Skip to main content

Full text of "The history of Waterbury, Connecticut; the original township embracing present Watertown and Plymouth, and parts of Oxford, Wolcott, Middlebury, Prospect and Naugatuck. With an appendix of biography, genealogy and statistics"

See other formats 


^'"'^^^H 

''^'i^ 


'"m 

university  of 

Connecticut 

libraries 


BOOK    974.67.B789H   c.  1 

BRONSON    #    HISTORY   OF    WATERBURY 

CONNECTICUT 


3  T153  ODOSSflbfl  b 


,vV3 

THE  &S 

/S.53 


HISTORY 

OF 

WATERBURY, 

CONNECTICUT; 


THE  OEIGINAL  TOWNSHIP  EMBEACING  PEESENT  WATEETOWN  AND 

PLYMOUTH,  AND  PAETS  OF  OXFOED,  WOLCOTT,  MIDDLE- 

BUEY,  PEOSPECT  AND  NAUGATUCK. 


APPENDIX 

OF 

BIOGRAPHY,  GENEALOGY  AND  STATISTICS. 

BY  IIENKY  BRONSON,  M.  D. 


WATERBURY: 
PUBLISHED  BY   BRONSON  BROTHERS. 

1858. 


J6nfe^ 


Entered,  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1858, 

By  henry  BRONSON, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  Connecticut. 


Printed  by 
T.  J.  STAFFORD, 

State  Street,  (Stafford  Building,) 
2^ew  na/ven. 


P  U  B  L  I  S  H  E  R  S'  NOTICE. 


TuE  late  financial  crisis  rendered  it  expedient  to  defer  for  a 
few  months  the  issue  of  this  volume.  The  publishers  would 
regret  this,  had  not  the  delay  enabled  them  to  add  to  the 
number  of  engravings  which  had  been  previously  provided. 
Subscribers  and  others,  it  is  hoped,  will  be  more  than  satisfied. 
Besides  the  additions  referred  to,  the  work  contains  over  one 
hundred  pages  of  printed  matter  more  than  Avere  anticipated 
when  proposals  were  issued.  In  point  of  mechanical  execu- 
tion, the  publishers  feel  assured  the  book  will  occasion  no 
disappointment,  unless  an  agreeable  one.  Tliey  have  taken 
pride  in  it,  and  have  not  been  actuated  wholly  by  selfish 
motives.  As  a  work  of  art,  however,  they  do  not  take  the  chief 
credit  to  themselves.  Unaided,  they  could  have  done  little 
towards  providing  the  numerous  and  expensive  engravings 
which  embellish  the  volume.  The  greater  proportion  of  these 
have  been  furnished  by  the  liberality  of  others — tliose  taking  a 
deep  interest  in  the  success  of  the  undertaking.  The  author 
has  sacrificed  much  time  and  labor,  with  the  object  of  benefit- 
ing his  native  town,  and  presenting  it  with  a  reliable  record 
of  its  past  history.  Of  his  success,  it  is  unnecessary  here 
to  speak.  It  has  been  the  aim  of  all  interested,  to  make  the 
book  in  substance  and  in  form,  worthy  of  the  dead,  honorable 
to  the  living,  and  acceptable  to  its  immediate  patrons. 

BROXSON  BROTHERS,  Publishers. 
Watkrbuuy,  May,  1858. 


I^IIEF^CE, 


It  is  well  known  that  my  father,  the  late  Bennet  Broxson,  spent 
much  time  in  the  collection  of  facts,  historical,  genealogical  and  tradi- 
tionary, relating  to  the  early  history  of  Waterbury.  He  began  this 
work  as  early  as  1820,  and  prosecuted  it  at  intervals  during  the  re- 
mainder of  his  life.  His  object  was  simply  information  on  a  subject 
which  had  been  almost  wholly  neglected  by  others.  He  not  only 
searched  the  Waterbury  records,  but  he  examined  the  records  of  Far- 
mington  and  Hartford,  and  opened  a  correspondence  with  those  suppos- 
ed to  have  important  knowledge  of  the  old  famillies  of  the  town.  Thus 
he  gained  a  large  stock  of  information,  and  about  1830,  wrote  a  brief 
historical  account  of  ancient  Waterbury,  which  he  delivered  to  his  fel- 
low citizens,  as  an  evening  lecture,  in  the  old  meeting  house.  After- 
wards, several  prominent  individuals  addressed  him  a  letter,  requesting 
him  to  write,  for  publication,  a  history  of  the  town.  He  neglected  to 
do  this ;  but  when  Barber  was  gathering  materials  for  the  Connecticut 
Historical  Collections,  he  furnished  a  sketch  of  the  old  town,  which, 
with  slight  alterations  and  some  abridgment,  was  published  in  that  work. 
Two  or  three  years  before  his  death,  he  re-wrote  his  lecture,  amplifying 
and  correcting  it,  and  bringing  it  down  to  the  close  of  the  Revolutionary 


IV  PEEFACE. 

war.  As  left,  it  would  liave  made,  perhaps,  fifteen  printed  pages. 
He  also  added  to,  and  perfected  in  a  certain  sense,  his  genealogical 
tables. 

Two  years  after  my  father's  death,  with  a  design  of  preserving  more 
effectually  what  had  been  done,  I  undertook  myself  to  write  a  fuller  his- 
torical sketch,  using  the  papers  which  have  been  mentioned,  and  the 
notes  and  extracts  from  records  from  which  these  had  been  prepared. 
My  labors  then  had  no  reference  to  publication.  At  this  stage,  the 
Messrs.  Bronson  Brothers  proposed  to  publish  a  History  of  Waterbury, 
and  applied  to  me  to  provide  the  manuscript.  Knowing  the  labor  and 
time  which  would  be  required,  I  declined.  No  one  else,  however,  being 
willing  to  undertake  the  task,  I  reversed  my  decision,  and  reluctantly  ' 
consented.  I  soon  found,  however,  that  in  order  to  understand  the  sub- 
ject— to  get  hold  of  its  spirit  and  to  construe  properly  the  facts — I 
must  begin  at  the  beginning  and  go  over  the  entire  ground  anew.  I 
have  done  this,  and  the  present  book  is  the  result.  Those  who  have 
been  engaged  in  a  similar  undertaking  need  not  be  told  the  labor  it  has 
cost ;  and  those  who  have  not  would  not  comprehend  me,  though  I 
should  attempt  to  tell  them. 

Deeming  the  early  events  of  Waterbury  in  most  need  of  a  historian — 
in  most  danger  of  being  lost — I  have  given  much  time  and  space  to 
them.  Modern  history,  particularly  that  which  may  be  called  post- 
Revolutionary,  has  not  engaged  so  much  of  my  attention.  After  1800, 
the  reader  will  find  only  items  and  fragments,  with  no  attempt  at  a 
complete  history.  What  I  have  neglected  it  is  to  be  hoped  some  other 
person,  who  is  willing  to  labor  in  a  humble  way  without  reward,  will 
undertake. 

In  what  I  have  written,  I  have  relied  mainly  on  record  evidence,  and 
rejected  traditional  knowledge  as  untrustworthy.  By  pursuing  this 
method,  I  have  sometimes  sacrificed  popular  attraction  to  truth  or,  in 
other  words,  history.     It  has  been  no  part  of  my  purpose  to  furnish  en- 


PREFACE.  V 

tertainment  for  the  readers  of  legendary  tales,  though  I  might  have  done 
so  with  comparatively  little  labor.  I  have  aimed  to  be  correct  in  all  that 
I  have  written  and  quoted.  It  cannot  be,  however,  that  I  have  made  no 
mistakes.  My  authorities  have  sometimes  been  copies  of  the  originals 
made  by  others,  which  in  some  cases  had  been  re-written,  possibly,  more 
than  once.  Facts  and  dates  given  in  letters  of  correspondence  may  have 
been  relied  on  too  implicitly.  It  is  easier  to  criticise  error  in  a  work  of 
this  kind,  than  wholly  to  avoid  it.  It  is  common  to  plead  "  want  of  time  " 
as  an  apology  for  shortcomings  in  this  regard  ;  but  I  claim  that  no  man 
has  a  right  to  make  a  book  in  haste.  In  my  quotations  from  early  rec- 
ords, I  have  preferred,  in  most  cases,  to  give  perfect  transcripts  of  the 
originals,  even  to  the  matter  of  orthography  and  punctuation.  My  ob- 
ject in  this  has  been  to  give  the  truest  history,  and  to  preserve  portions 
of  the  record  which  might  be  lost.  Thinking  it  improbable  that  any  one 
would  again  go  over  the  ground  of  my  inquiries,  at  any  rate,  with 
equal  advantages,  I  have  endeavored  to  perpetuate  what  I  could  with 
authentic  types.  If  the  reader  complains  that  I  have  introduced  trivial 
subjects,  and  have  spent  too  much  time  on  things  of  little  importance,  I 
have  only  to  say,  that  I  have  occupied  myself  with  the  matters  which 
most  interested  those  whose  history  I  have  written.  They  were  men 
who  gave  their  time  to  their  own  private  affairs — to  their  individual, 
social,  religious  and  material  interests — and  I  must  needs  dwell  upon 
these  or  be  silent. 

Of  those  who  have  assisted  me  in  the  preparation  of  this  work,  I  must 
mention  particularly  Mr.  Philo  M.  Trowbridge.  He  has  given  me 
important  aid  in  the  examination  of  records  and  in  furnishing  me  with 
extracts.  He  has  had  charge  of  the  genealogies  contained  in  the  Appen- 
dix, and  is  chiefly  responsible  for  that  portion  of  the  work.  I  have 
furnished  him  my  own  and  ray  father's  collections  of  materials ;  and 
from  these  and  the  original  records,  and  his  own  independent  inquiries, 
he   has  compiled  the  tables.     These  extended   genealogies   were   not 


VI  PKEFACE. 

contemplated  in  the  original  plan  of  the  work.  I  designed  to  give  a 
somewhat  particular  account  of  the  orginal  proprietors  of  Waterbury 
and  their  children,  as  I  have  done  in  Chapters  XI  and  XII ;  but  the 
continuation  of  the  subject  in  the  Appendix  was  an  afterthought  of  the 
publishers  and  others.  This  will  explain  how  it  happens  that  the  gene- 
alogies of  particular  families  are  to  be  sought  for  in  diflferent  portions  of 
the  work. 

Mr.  Sylvester  Judd  of  Northampton  has  given  me  much  information 
concerning  the  first  settlers  of  Waterbury.  Rev.  William  S.  Porter  of 
New  Haven  has  kindly  allowed  me  the  use  of  his  papers  on  the  geneal- 
ogy of  the  early  settlers  of  Farmington. 

In  the  preparation  of  this  volume,  I  have  found  it  difficult  to  divest 
myself  of  the  idea  that  I  am  still  a  resident  of  my  native  town.  Find- 
ing this,  on  the  whole,  a  pleasant  delusion,  I  have  taken  no  pains  to 
dispel  it.  From  many  passages  in  the  work,  the  reader  would  infer  that 
Waterbury  had  not  ceased  to  be  my  dwelling  place. 

I  am  mortified  to  find  that  there  are  a  few  errors  which  escaped  notice 
till  the  sheets  were  printed.  They  are  in  part  owing  to  my  inexperience 
in  reading  proofs.  The  most  important  of  them,  it  is  hoped,  have  been 
corrected  in  the  errata  at  the  end. 

New  Haven,  December,  1857. 


INDEX  TO  ENGRAYIXGS. 


View  of  the  City  of  Waterbury, Opposite  Title  Page. 

Portrait  of  Bennet  Bronsox, Opposite  Page  1 

Plan  of  the  Village  of  Mattatuck, "  "  16 

Portrait  of  Samdel  Hopkins,  D.  D., "  "  32 

"        Mark  Leavenworth, "  "  48 

Map  of  the  Old  Township  of  WATERnriiv, ■            ■  04 

Portrait  of  J.  M.  L.  Scovill, •  "  80 

"         Dr.  Isaac  Bronsox, •  "  1)6 

Eli  Terry, "  "  11-2 

Fac-similes, ■'   •        "  128 

Portrait  OF  Samuel  M.  Hopkins,  LL.  I)., "  "  144 

William  n.  Scovill, •  "  160 

Deacon  James  Brown, "  '  176 

Josiah  Bronson, •'  "  192 

Dr.  Ambrose  Ives, "  "  208 

Captain  Reuben  Holmks, "  "  224 

Almon  Farrell, "  "  240 

Deacon  Aaron  Bexkdict, "  "  256 

Alvin  Bronson, "  "  272 

Seth  Thomas, "  "  288 

John  Buckingham, '  "  S04 

Green  Kendrick, "  "  320 

Silas  Bronsox, "  "  352 

Israel  Holmes, '  "  384 

Benedict  AND  Burnham  Maxufacturixc;  Co's  Works,  "  "  432 

Waterbury  Brass  Company's  AVorks, "  "  404 

Scovill  Manufacturing  Company's  Work.^, "  "  496 

Brown  AND  Brothers' Works, "  "  528 

Holmes,  Booth  and  Haydens'  Works, "  "  oCO 


ADDITIONAL  COREECTIONS. 


The  delay  in  the  publication  of  this  work  has  given  the  author  an  opportunity 
to  add  to  the  corrections  which  will  be  found  at  the  end  of  the  volume. 

Page  13th,  17th  line  from  bottom,  after  date,  insert  (May  21,  16*77.) 

Page  19,  2d  line  from  top, /or  country,  rcaJ  county. 

Page  26,  6th  line  from  top, /or  1673,  read  1672. 

Page  43,  3d  line  from  bottom,  after  1686-7,  erase  the  period  and  insert  a  comma. 

Page  86th,  4th  line  from  bottom,  erase  the  sentence  beginning  with  "It  will  bo 
noticed." 

Page  191,  5th  line  from  top — This  John  died  an  infant.  A  second  John  Stanley 
(baptized  May  25,  1682,)  m.  Aug.  1710,  Hannah,  daughter  of  Dea.  Samuel  Porter, 
and  Dec.  9,  1714,  Mary  AVriglit.  He  was  made  a  bachelor  proprietor  in  1715, 
(see  p.  120,)  and  died  Sep.  8,  1748,  having  had  three  children. 

Page  191,  24th  line  from  top — The  Thomas  Stanley  who  m.  Anne  Peck  was  not 
the  son  of  Lieut.  John  of  Waterbury,  but  of  Capt.  John  Stanley  of  Farmington, 
and  died  April  14,  1713.  It  was  his  widow  Anne,  and  not  he,  who  d.  May  23,  1718. 
(See  p.  189.) 

Page  239,  13th  line  from  bottom, /or  school  and,  reafi  school  land. 

Page  326,  add  to  the  list  of  those  engaged  in  the  old  French  war,  the  name  of 
Moses  Cook,  drunmicr. 

Page  421,  2d  and  3d  Hnes  from  top, /o7-  Wealthy  U.  Upson,  read  Mrs.  Wcalihy 
Hopkins  Norton,  (whose  maiden  name  was  Upson.) 

Page  462,  20th  line  from  top, /or  1st,  Euth  Frisbie,  2d,  Olive  Warner,  read  1st, 
Olive  Warner,  2d,  Ruth  Frisbie. 

Page  486,  last  line, /or  David,  read  Daniel. 

Page  487,  15th  line  from  top, /or  Charles,  read  William. 

Page  490,  6th  line  from  bottom,  erase  Benjamin  and  insert  Alma,  m.  Eli  Curtis ; 
IV.  Anna  Maria ;  V.  Philomela ;  VI.  Benjamin.     Other  children  d.  in  childhood. 


CONTENTS, 


CHAPTER  I. 

Discovert  of  the  Naugatuck  Valley  :  Preparations  for  a  Settlement,  . .       1 


CHAPTER  II. 
The  Settlement  begun  :  Town  Center, 12 


CHAPTER  III. 
Delinquent  Subscribers, 24 

CHAPTER  IV. 
Subscribers  who  finally  secured  their  Rights, 31 

CHAPTER  V. 
The  Common  Fence  ano  Common  Field, 47 

•  CHAPTER  VI. 
Indian  Purchases  :  Incorporation  of  the  Town:  Sequestered  Land.s,.  .. .     62 

CHAPTER  VII. 
Mills, "79 


CHAPTER  VIII. 
Roads,  Bridges,  &c., 93 


CHAPTER  IX. 

Indian  Wars  :  the  Great  Flood:  the  Great  Sickness, 101 


CHAPTER  X. 
Bachelor  Proprietors, 113 


CHAPTER  XI. 
Personal  Notices  of  the  first  Settlers  of  "Waterbury, 129 


/ 


-"^  J 


Vlll  CONTENTS. 


PER  XII.  J 

IS,  CONTIXUED, ./.A.. 


CHAPTER  XII. 
Pkksonal  Notices  of  the  first  Settlers,  contixued, ../..")....  167 


CHAPTER  XIII. 

Ecclesiastical  Affairs  :  Mr.  Peck's  Ministry,  , . 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

Ecclesiastical  Affairs  :  Mr.  Southmayd's  Ministry 215 


CHAPTER  XV. 
h^f        Schools, . . .  .^^^..^^^^ 


\^: 


y^--"^  CHAPTER  X^O^^  3 


Population  increases  :  Immigration, ^^..-r-rrT^ 243 


— -^                                                CHAPTER  XVII. 
The  Settlement  extends  :  new  Societies, 250 


CHAPTER  XVIII. 
Mr.  Leavenworth's  Ministry  :  the  third  Meeting  House, 283 


CHAPTER  XIX. 
Episcopacy  in  "Waterbury, 292 


CHAPTER  XX. 
Church  and  State  :  old  French  War, 315 


CHAPTER  XXI. 
Revolutionary  History, 


CHAPTER  XXII. 
After  the  War  :  Miscellaneous  Items, , 


APPENDIX. 

I.  Biography, 370 

II.  Genealogy, 458 

III.  Later  Ecclesiastical  Societies  :  Manufacturing  :  Statistics, 653 


'^T^ZO^ 


J.XeUy.  frintir. 


HISTORY  OF  ¥ATERBURY. 


CHAPTEE    I. 


DISCOVERY    OF   THE   NAUGATUCK   VALLEY :    PREPARATIONS  FOR  A 
SETTLEMENT. 

Moke  than  a  ceutuiy  and  a  quarter  intervened  between  the 
discovery  of  America  and  the  settlement  by  Europeans  of  any 
part  of  New  England.  In  1620,  a  small  band  of  English 
Puritans,  one  hundred  and  one  in  number,  including  women 
and  children,  planted  themselves  at  Plymouth,  on  the  eastern 
shore  of  Massachusetts.  For  a  long  time,  this  feeble  colony 
struggled  for  existence.  At  length,  however,  the  English  set- 
tlers became  firmly  established  at  Plymouth  and  the  Massa- 
chusetts Bay.  In  the  course  of  the  years  163-i  and  1635,  sev- 
eral parties  from  Watertown,  Dorchester  and  Newtown,  (now 
Cambridge,)  in  the  neighborhood  of  Boston,  made  their  way 
through  the  wilderness  to  the  banks  of  the  Connecticut  River, 
and  established  themselves  at  Wethersfield,  "Windsor  and 
Hartford.     Mr.  Hooker  and  his   congregation  of  sixty  persons 

1 


Z  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUEY. 

came  from  JSTewtown  and  settled  in  Hartford.  These  towns,  in 
their  early  infancy,  in  1637,  waged  a  successful  war  with  the 
Pequot  Indians,  and  conquered  their  country.  Soon  after  the 
conclusion  of  this  war,  or  in  1638,  a  small  colony  went  from 
Boston,  and  settled  at  New  Haven,  Milford  and  Guilford. 
From  1637  to  1675,  thirty-eight  years,  the  inhabitants  of  Con- 
necticut, and  indeed  of  all  New  England,  enjoyed  almost  unin- 
terrupted peace.  During  this  period  of  comparative  quietness, 
the  settlements  in  Connecticut  were  extended  through  the 
State,  from  north  to  south,  on  both  banks  of  the  Connecticut 
River,  and  from  east  to  west  in  all  the  towns  bordering  on  the 
sea-coast.  In  1 61:0,  the  people  of  Hartford  commenced  a  set- 
tlement at  Farmington,  being  tlie  first  made  in  Connecticut 
away  from  navigable  waters.  From  this  time  to  1673,  small 
beginnings  of  settlements  were  made  at  Norwich,  Derby, 
Wallinglbrd,  Simsbury,  Woodbury  and  Plainfield.  Up  to 
the  last  named  date,  with  the  above  exceptions,  the  whole 
State,  as  now  constituted,  was  a  wilderness,  in  the  possession  of 
the  native  Indians.  It  is  believed,  however,  that  no  Indian 
settlement  existed,  at  the  time  of  its  discovery,  within  the 
limits  of  ancient  Waterbury.  The  nearest  wigwams  were  in 
Farmington,  Derby  and  Woodbury,  where  native  tribes  exist- 
ed. The  territory  of  Waterbury  was  claimed  by  the  tribes 
of  the  two  former  towns.  It  was  used  as  a  hunting  ground. 
It  was  first  visited  by  white  men  in  tlie  pursuit  of  game. 

It  appears  that  as  early  as  1657,  some  of  the  inhabitants  of 
Farmington  had  become  acquainted  with  a  portion  of  the 
Naugatuck  Yalley,  and  obtained  from  some  of  the  native 
claimants,  belonging  to  the  Tunxis  or  Farmington  tribe,  a  deed 
of  a  tract  of  land  which  secured  to  themselves  certain  rights 
and  privileges  therein  mentioned.  The  deed,  which  is  copied 
from  the  Farmington  record,  runs  as  follows  : 

This  Witnesseth  that  "Wee  Kepaquamp  and  Querrimus  and  Mataueage  have 
sould  to  William  Lewis  and  Samuell  Steele  of  ffarmington  A  psell  or  A  trackt  of 
Land  called  matetacoke  that  is  to  Say  the  hill  from  whence  John  Standley  and 
John  Andrews:  brought  the  black  lead  and  all  the  Land  within  eight:  mylle:  of 
that  hill:  on  every  side:  to  dig:  and  carry  away  what  they  will  and  To  build  on 
y'  for  y«  Vse  of  them  that  Labor  there:  and  not  otherwise  To  improve:  y® 
Land  In   witnes   whereof  wee;  have    hereunto  set   our:  hands:    and  those:  Indi- 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY.  3 

ans  above  mentioned  must  free  the  purchasers  from  all  Claymos:  by  any  other 
Indyans: 

William  Lewis 

Witnes  John  Steel  Samuel  Steele 

febuary:    y«  S^^  1657 


The  niarke    ^-^   of  Kepaquamp: 


The  mark     ^^of  Querrinius 


The  mark  of  ^  iM^    )        A  Mataneajrc 


Tlie  abov^e  deed  is  copied  into  Mr.  Woodruff's  sketch  of  the 
town  of  Litchfiehl,  publislied  in  1845.  Mr.  W.  makes  the  fol- 
lowing remarks  :  "  Precisely  where  the  hill  referred  to  in  this 
deed  was  situated,  I  have  been  unable  to  discover,  but  from 
the  subsequent  claims  of  the  grantees,  from  tradition,  and  from 
the  deed  itself,  it  would  seem  that  it  was  in  the  southern  part 
of  Ilarwinton,  and  embraced  that  town,  and  also  some  portion 
of  Pljaiiouth  (then  Mattatuck  or  Waterbury)  and  Litchfield. 
This  purchase  was  made  by  the  grantees  in  behalf  of  them- 
selves and  a  company  composed  of  certain  inhabitants  of 
Farmington."  It  doubtless  proved  valueless  for  the  purposes 
for  which  it  was  obtained,  as  we  hear  nothing  further  concern- 
ing the  black  lead. 

Another  deed,  bearing  date  the  11th  day  of  August,  1Y18, 
from  Petthuzso  and  Toxcrunuck,  successors  of  the  grantors, 
conveyed  to  the  Farmington  people  the  whole  title  to  the 
above  lands.  The  two  deeds  were  the  ground  of  a  claim  on 
the  part  of  the  grantees  to  the  lands  described  ;  but  it  was 
truly  said  that  the  territory  north  of  Waterbury  and  west  of 
Farmington  had  been  conveyed  by  the  Colony  in  Jan.,  168G,  to 


4:  niSTOKY   OF   WATERBUKY. 

the  towns  of  Hartford  and  Windsor.  Besides,  there  seems  to 
have  been  a  colonial  statute  in  o]3eration,  in  1718,  and  previ- 
ously, declaring  that  "  no  person  or  persons  in  this  colony, 
whether  inhabitants  or  not,  shall  buy,  hire  or  receive  a  gift,  or 
mortgage  any  parcel  of  Land  or  Lands,  of  any  Lidian  or  Indi- 
ans for  the  future,  except  he  or  they  do  buy  or  receive  the 
same  for  the  use  of  the  Colony,  or  for  some  plantation  or  vil- 
lage, or  with  the  allowance  of  the  General  Court  of  this  Col- 
ony," Nevertheless,  the  Farmington  company,  in  1718,  re- 
ceived from  the  towns  of  Hartford  and  Windsor  a  grant  of 
one  sixth  of  the  township  of  Litchfield,  in  consideration  of  their 
making  over  to  said  towns  their  interest  in  the  disputed  terri- 
tory. 

In  process  of  time,  certain  hunters  or  explorers  from  Farm- 
ington, in  their  excursions  into  the  western  forests,  discovered 
the  flats  or  interval  on  the  Naugatuck  River,  where  the  city 
of  Waterbury  now  stands.  They  told  their  friends  what  they 
had  seen.  So  favorable  was  their  report,  and  such  the  disposi- 
tion of  the  early  settlers  to  push  out  further  into  the  forest, 
that  tliey  began  at  once  to  think  of  emigration.  But  at  that 
period,  according  to  the  laws  of  the  Colony,  no  person  could 
acquire  a  title  to  Indian  lands,  or  make  a  settlement  upon  them 
without  the  permission  of  the  General  Court.  Having  there- 
fore sent  out  from  among  themselves  a  committee  to  view  the 
place  for  a  new  plantation,  and  obtained  from  them  a  favorable 
report,  the  Farmington  people  petitioned  tlie  "  honered  gen- 
eral court "  for  liberty  to  make  a  settlement.  This  was  in  the 
fall  of  1673.  The  following  is  the  petition  referred  to,  preced- 
ed by  the  report  of  the  committee  spoken  of : — 

We   whos   names   are  here  under  writen  partly  for  our   own   satisfaction  and 
for  the  satisfaction  of  some  others  haue  bene  too  uieu  matitacoocke  in  refarans 
to  a  plantation  doo  Judge  it  capable  of  the  same, 
thomas  newell  Sean"" 
John  warner  Sean"" 
Richard  Scmar 
Octtober:  the  6:   1G73 

Octob"-  9,  73 
To  the  honerd  generall  court  now  siting  In  Hartford 
Houered  gentlemen  and  fathers  we  being  sensible  of  our  great  need  of  a  comfort- 
able Subsistence  doe  hereby  make  our  address  to  your  selfs  In  order  to  the  Same 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  O 

Not  Questiouing  your  care  and  faithfulness  In  y^  premisses:  allso  hoping  of  your 
frecness  and  I'eadyness  to  accomidate  your  poor  suplicants  with  y'  which  we 
Judge  to  be:  In  your  hands:  acording  to  an  orderly  proceeding  we  therefore 
whose  names  are  hereafter  Inserted  to  humbly  petition!  your  honors  to  take  cog- 
nicanee;  of  our  state  who  want  Land  to  Labor  vpon:  for  our  subsistance  &  now 
hauing  found  out  a  track  at  a  place  called  by  y*  Indians  matitacoocke:  which  we 
aprihend  maj-  susfetiently  acomidate  to  make  a  small  plantation :  we  are  therefore 
bould  hereby  to  petetion  your  honors  to  grant  vs  y«  liberty  of  planting  y^  same 
with  as  many  others  as  y'  may  be:  capable  comfortably  to  entertain  and  as  for  the 
purchasing  of  y«  natives  with  your  alowance  we  shall  take  care  of:  &  so  not  to 
trouble  with  father  Inlargements  *  *  *  *  only  desireing  your  due  consideration 
&  a  return  by  our  Louing  ffreind  John  Lankton 

Thomas  Newell  Danioll  wancr 

John  Lankton  abraham  andrews 

John  andrews  Thomas  hancox 

John  waruer  seineo""  John  Carrington 

Daniell  porter  Dauiell  andrews 

Edmund  scott  Joseph  hancox 

John  Standly  Junior  Thomas  standly 

Abraham  brouuson  Obadiah  richards 

Richard  semer:  Timothy  standly 

John  waner  Junior  william  higgenson 

Isack  brounson  John  porter 

Samuell  hacox  Thomas  barnes 

John  welton  John  Woodruff 

[State  Records — Towns  and  Lands,  Vol.  I,  p.  162.] 

Here  is  tlie  action  upon  this  petition  : 

Oct.  1673 
In  answer  to  the  petition  of  Seueral  of  the  Inhabitants  of  the  Town  of  Farm- 
ington  that  Mattatock  that  those  lands  might  be  granted  for  a  plantation.  This 
Court  haue  Seen  cause  to  order  that  those  lauds  may  be  viewed  sometime  between 
this  and  the  Court  in  may  next  and  that  rcporte  be  made  to  the  Court  in  may 
next  whether  it  be  Judged  fitt  to  make  a  plantation.  The  committee  appointed 
are  Lnt:  Tho:  Bull,  Lnt:  Rob'  webster  and  Daniel  pratt. 

[Nicholas  Olmsted  was  afterwards  substituted  for  Daniel  Pratt,  as  a  member  of 
the  Committee.] 

April  6,  7,  8,  9,  1674. 

We  whose  names  are  underwritten  (according  to  the  desire  and  appointment  of 
y«  honoured  court)  haue  ueiewed  y®  lands  upon  Mattatuck  riuer  in  order  to  a 
plantation,  we  do  apprehend  that  there  is  about  six  hundred  acres  of  meadow  & 
plowing  land  lying  on  both  sides  of  y«  riuer  besides  upland  conuenient  for  a  towne 
plot,  with  a  suitable  out  let  into  y«  woods  on  y«  west  of  y*  riuer,  and  good  feed- 
ing lands  for  cattell. 


6  IIISTOKY    OF   WATERBUEY. 

The  meadow  &  plowing  land  above  written  a  considerable  part  of  it  lyeth  in  two 
peices  near  ye  town  plot,  y«  rest  in  smaller  parcels,  y«  farthest  of  which  we 
iudge  not  aboue  fower  miles  from  y®  towne  plot ;  and  our  apprehensions  are  that 
it  may  accommodate  thirty  familyes 

Thomas  Bull 
NicHo:  Olmstkad 
Robert  webster 

The  "  two  jjieces  near  y®  town  plot "  alluded  in  the  above 
report,  are  probably  tlie  level  river  lands  on  the  east  side  of 
the  river  afterwards  called  Manhan,  or  Mahan,  Meadow,  near 
which  a  final  settlement  was  afterwards  made,  and  the  tract  of 
meadow  on  the  west  side  of  the  river  near  the  mouth  of  Steel's 
Brook.  The  most  distant  piece  "  not  above  fower  miles  "  was 
most  likely  the  tract  which  at  a  later  period  was  called  Judd's 
meadow,  now  a  part  of  I^augatuck.  These  natural  meadows 
were  looked  upon  with  much  favor  by  the  early  settlers,  and 
were  regarded  not  only  as  convenient  but  necessary  to  the  ex- 
istence of  a  new  plantation.  On  them  they  depended  for  fod- 
der for  their  "  cattell "  during  the  long  and  severe  winters. 
Artificial  meadows  are  prepared  with  difliculty  and  require 
much  toil  and  time.  They  absorb  capital,  and  appear  only  in 
the  more  advanced  stages  of  society. 

The  foregoing  report  of  the  committee  showed  the  reason- 
ableness of  the  request  of  the  "  supplicants."  The  petition 
was  granted,  "and  the  Court  appointed  Major  John  Talcott, 
Lieut.  Eobert  Webster,  Lieut.  Nicholas  Olmstead,  Ens.  Samuel 
Steel,  Ensign  John  Wadsworth,  a  committee  to  regulate  and 
order  the  settling  of  a  plantation  at  Mattatuck."  This  com- 
mittee was  composed  of  men  of  note,  who  bore  honorable 
names,  well  known  in  the  history  of  the  Colony.  Their  titles 
attest  the  high  consideration  with  which  they  were  regarded. 

Major  Talcott  of  Hartford  was  one  of  his  majesty's  justices 
of  the  peace,  and  assistant  from  1062  to  1688,  and  treasurer 
of  the  Colony  for  nineteen  years.  He  was  distinguished  for 
his  gallantry  and  success  in  King  Philip's  war,  in  1676.  He 
commanded  a  body  of  five  hundred  and  fifty  English  and 
Mohegans  in  several  successful  expeditions  in  that  year.  He 
died,  leaving  children,  July  23d,  1688.  The  inventory  of  his 
estate  amounted  to  £2,272. 


HISTORY    OF    AVATEEBURY.  7 

Lient.  Webster  of  Middletown  and  Hartford  was  a  son  of 
Gov.  John  Webster,  and  married  a  sister  of  Gov.  Treat,  by 
Avliom  he  had  many  sons  and  danghters.  He  was  a  respecta- 
ble man,  though  not  distinguished  like  his  father.  He  died  in 
1676,  making  his  widow,  Susannah,  executrix  of  his  wiU.  His 
son  Jonathan  married  a  sister  of  John  Hopkins,  an  early  settler 
of  Mattatuck. 

Lieut.  Olmstead  of  Harlford  was  a  son  of  James  Olmstead, 
(who  died  in  1640,)  and  married  a  daughter  of  Joseph  Looniis 
of  Windsor.  He  was  a  Pequot  soldier  and  apparantly  a  wild 
youth.  In  1640,  for  his  moral  delinquencies,  he  was  "  ad- 
judged'' by  "the  P'^ticular  Court"  "to  pay  twenty  pownd  fyne 
to  the  country  and  to  stand  vppon  the  Pillery  at  Hartford 
the  next  lecture  day,  during  the  time  of  the  lecture.  He  is  to 
be  sett  on,  a  lytic  before  tlie  beginning  and  to  stay  thereon  a 
litle  after  the  end."  He  was  a  de])uty  in  1672,  and  in  active 
service,  as  a  lieutenant,  in  King  Philip's  war.  He  died  in 
1681,  and  was  the  father  of  several  sons  and  daughters. 

Ens.  Samuel  Steele  was  the  son  of  John  Steele,  an  early 
settler  of  Hartford  and  a  prominent  man.  He  was  born  in  1626, 
and,  together  with  his  father,  removed  to  Farmington  at  an  early 
date,  and  became  one  of  the  original  settlei-s  of  that  town.  He 
married  Mary  Boosy  and  had  many  children;  Mary,  Rachel, 
Sarah,  Samuel,  John,  Benoni,  James,  Hannah,  Ebenezer.  In 
May,  1669,  he  was  a  deputy  to  the  General  Court  in  Hartford  ; 
and  in  1674,  was  approved  as  lieutenant  of  the  Farmington 
"Traine  Band."  Late  in  life,  he  removed  to  Wethersfield,  and 
died  in  1685.  He  appears  to  have  been  a  respectable  but  not 
a  distinguished  man.  As  a  member  of  the  committee,  he  was 
one  of  the  most  active,  and  was  connected  by  marriage  with 
some  of  the  leading  planters  of  Mattatuck.  His  sister  Mary 
married  Serg.  William  Judd,and  his  sister  Sarah,  Lieut.  Thomas 
Judd ;  while  his  brother  John  married  a  sister  of  the  Judds. 
He  is  the  only  one  of  the  committee  who  has  left  his  name  in 
tlie  territory  he  assisted  to  plant,  and  connected  it  indissolubly 
with  its  physical  features.  Steel's  Brook  and  the  tracts  of  land 
upon  its  borders,  Steel's  Meadow  and  Steel's  Plain,  will  pre- 
serve the  memory  of  Samuel  Steele. 


O  IIISTOKY   OF   WATEKBURY. 

Ensign  Jolm  Waclswortli  of  Farmington,  was  a  son  of  Wil- 
liam Wadsworth.  of  Hartford,  and  brother,  I  believe,  of  the 
famous  Captain  Joseph  Wadsworth,  of  charter-oak  memory. 
He  was  an  assistant  from  1679  to  his  death  in  1689.  Some  of 
his  descendants  have  been  distinguished. 

The  business  of  this  committee  was  "  to  regulate  and  order," 
in  the  language  of  the  record,  the  aifairs  of  the  plantation  ;  to 
make  rules  for  the  planters  and  prescribe  the  conditions  of  set- 
tlement ;  to  select  a  site  for  the  town  ;  to  lay  out  the  house  lots 
and  to  dispose  of  them  and  of  the  other  lands,  so  far  as  exj)e- 
dient,  by  grant ;  to  direct  concerning  highways  and  fences  ;  to 
consult  with  the  people,  and  to  watch  over  their  best  interests. 
They  were  expected  to  see  to  it  that  education,  virtue  and  re- 
ligion were  properly  cared  for  in  the  infancy  of  the  settlement, 
and  to  act  with  authority,  when  the  emergency  and  the 
common  weal  required  it.  They  were  selected  as  the  tem- 
porary guardians  and  the  fathers  of  the  plantation,  with  all 
the  j)ower  usually  exercised  by  the  town  authorities.  In  fact, 
they  were  to  found  a  town  ;  to  organize  it,  and  to  supply  it 
with  locomotive  force,  until  it  got  legs  of  its  own.  This  done, 
their  duties  were  ended,  and  their  trust  could  l)e  resigned. 

The  assembly's  committee,  (called  on  the  town  records 
the  Grand  Committee,)  thus  constituted,  in  pursuance  of  their 
duties,  drew  up  the  following  Articles  of  Association  and  . 
Agreement,  which  the  proposed  settlers  signed  : — 

Articles  agred  vpon  and  concluded  by  us  whos  names  are  vnder  writen  the 
Comity  for  settling  a  plantation  att  mattatucke  as  followeth  that 

1  Euery  on[e]  that  is  excepted  for  an  inhabitant  at  matatueke  shall  have  eight 
acres  for  a  hous  lott 

2  We  agre  that  the  distribution  of  medow  shall  be  proportioned  to  each 
person  Acording  to  estats  [propriety]  noe  person  exceding  a  hundred  pound  alot 
ment  except  too  or  thre  alotments  which  we  the  Comite  shall  lay  out  acording  to 
our  best  discrestion 

3  Also  wee  agree  that  all  taxes  and  Ratts  that  shall  be  leuyed  for  defraying  pub- 
lick  charges  shall  be  payed  proportion  ably  acording  to  their  medow  alotments  and 
this  article  to  stand  in  full  fore  and  vertue  fine  years  next  folowing  the  datt  here- 
of and  after  the  end  and  expiration  of  fiue  yers  all  Ratts  for  defraying  publike 
charges  shall  be  leuyed  and  raised  upon  persons  and  estats  acording  to  the  law  or 
custom  of  the  coutry 

4  We  determin  that  every  parson  that  tacks  up  alotments  att  mattatucke  within 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY.  9 

four  }'er  after  the  datt  hereof  shall  build  agood  substan  shall  Dwelling  house  [at 
least  eighteen  feet  in  length  and  sixteen  feet  wide  and]*  nine  foot  between  joynts 
with  a  good  chimly  in  the  forsaid  place. 

5  Itt  is  agred  in  case  any  parson  shall  faile  of  building  as  aforsaid:  a  dweling  house 
upon  his  lott  as  is  inioyned  within  the  4th  article  within  the  terme  of  four  vers 
after  the  date  herof  shall  forfit  all  his  alotments  att  mattatucke  and  lose  all  his 
right  and  title  therein  buildings  only  Excepted  to  be  dis  posed  to  such:  other 
meet  parsons  for  im  proue  ment  as  shall  be  excepted  by  the  Comity  acording  to 
the  conditions  of  these  Articles 

6  And  itt  is  also  agreed  that  euery  one  to  whom  alotments  are  granted  shall  par- 
sonly  tack  up  his  resedenc  as  an  in  habitant  att  mattatuck  in  his  own  house  within 
the  term  of  four  yeres  after  the  date  hereof  and  upon  failler  or  defalte  shall  forfitt 
his  lands  and  alottments  att  mattatuck  to  be  improued  as  aforsaid  by  the  comite 

7  Itt  is  further  concluded  that  Every  parson  that  shall  be  posesed  of  lands  att  the 
said  mattatock  shall  inhabit  and  dwell  ther  in  his  own  House  for  the  time  and 
term  of  four  yers  after  he  hath  built  acording  to  the  Tenu''  and  true  meaning  of 
the  fourth  Article  and  untill  the  said  foure  yers  be  ended  no  parson  shall  haue 
pouer  to  mack  any  alynation  or  sale  of  the  afor  said  lands  of  what  he  or  they  are 
posesed  of 

8  J'inaly  itt  is  determined  that  all  those  parsons  to  whom  alottments  Are  granted 
(by  vs  the  comity)  shall  be  ingaged  to  the  forgoing  Articles  by  a  subscription  of 
tlieir  names  or  marcks 

And  for  a  full  confirnuition  of  the  forgoing  articles  wee  the  comitie  haue  this 
thir  tyeth  of  may  in  the  yere  one  tliousand  six  hundred  seuenty  and  four:  sub- 
scribed our  names 


We  whos  names  are  under  writen  doe  Igag  a^      "^^^^  Talcott 
faithful  submission  to  and  performance   of  the        JJo^ert  webster 
~        .            .  ,             ...                 1       1    ii  ■      •      r     Nicholas  ohnsted 
forgomg  articles  as  wittness  our  hands  this  sixt         ., 

„°        .      ,            ,  .H.                                                    bamuel  steel 
of  June  in  the  yer  lb74 

J      John  wadsworth 

John  Langhton 

loo 

Thomas  Ilankox 

100 

John  Andres 

loo 

William  Judd 

100 

Thomas  Juddl  Ju'' 

100 

John  Warner  Jun 

90 

Edmun  Scoot 

100 

Thomas  Richarson 

50 

John  wilton 

080 

William  Higason 

70 

Abraham  Andrus 

080 

John  Carington 

060 

Isaac  Brunson 

090 

Obadiah  Richards 

080 

John  Stanly  Ju'' 

100 

Thomas  NeweU  [for]  son 

100 

Samuell  hicok 
Richard  Seamor 

085 
100 

Sargt  John  Stanly  for  son 
Daniel  Warner 

95 
60 

Abraham  Brounson 

080 

John  Warner  sen 

100 

Isaac  brounson  ingageth  for  him 

John  Judd 

100 

John  Porter 

080 

Joseph  Hecoks 

060 

*  The  clause  in  brackets  is  presumed  to  have  been  inadvertently  left  out  in  tlie  record.     I 
have  supplied  the  omission  from  other  copies. 


10  IIISTOKY    OF    WATEKBUEY. 

Joh  bronson  Ju'  080         Thomas  Jud  seno""  for  his        j 

Thomas  Gridly  080  son  Sam"  J"'^^*^ 

Danill  Porter  for  son  090         Sam' '  Gridly  90,  th  newell* 

Soon  after  the  signing  of  the  articles  of  settlement,  a  new 
and  more  thorough  exploration  of  the  country  was  made,  with 
a  view  of  finding  out  its  capabilities  and  deciding  on  a  place 
for  the  center  of  the  town.  In  the  meantime,  however,  the 
committee  took  the  precaution  to  extinguish  any  title  to  the 
land  which  was  in  the  native  or  Indian  proprietors.  "  Per 
order  and  in  the  name  and  behalf  of  the  Genaral  Court  of 
Connecticut  in  New  England,"  they  purchased  of  certain  In- 
dians, eleven  in  number,  living  in  Farmington  and  belonging 
to  the  Tunxis  tribe,  (and  took  to  themselves  a  deed  of  the 
same,)  a  certain  tract  of  land  at  Mattatuck,  lying  on  both 
sides  of  the  Naugatuck  River,  ten  miles  in  length  from  north 
to  soutli,  and  six  miles  in  breadth  from  east  to  west,  but- 
ting east  on  Farmington  bounds,  south  on  Pegasset,  (Derby,) 
west  on  Pegasset,  Pomperang,  (Woodbury,)  and  Potatuck, 
(Southbury,)  and  north  on  the  wilderness.  The  consideration 
was  thirty-eight  pounds  in  hand,  and  "divers  good  causes," 
and  the  deed  bore  date  Aug.  21st,  1674.  It  may  be  found  in 
the  second  volume  of  the  Waterbury  Land  Records,  page  224, 
and  is  signed  (by  marks)  by  Caraachacpio,  James,  Putteko, 
Atumtacko,  Alwaash,  Spinning  Squaw,  Nosaheagon,  John 
Compound,  Queramousk,  Chere,  Aupkt.  The  witnesses  are 
Samuel  Willis,  Benjamin  Fenn  and  Philip  Lewis. 

During  the  same  season,  a  site  was  selected  for  the  contem- 
plated village.  It  was  the  elevated  ground  on  the  west  side 
the  river,  which,  from  this  circumstance,  has  ever  since  been 
known  by  the  name  of  Old  Town  Plat,  or  Town  Plot.  It 
was  airy  and  showy  ground,  overlooking  the  alluvial  lands 
upon  the  river.     Here,  three  quarters  of  a  mile  west  of  the 

*  Thomas  Newell,  Jr.,  was  afterwards  substituted  for  Samuel  Gridley,  and  the  name  is  placed 
here  in  the  original. 

This  document  is  taken  from  the  second  volume  of  the  Waterbury  Land  Records,  pages  221 
and  222.  It  is  in  the  hand  of  John  Stanly,  copied  professedly  from  the  original  by  direction  of 
the  proprietors,  (in  1717,)  after  he  removed  from  Waterbury,  and  certified  by  John  Judd,  then 
the  town  clerk.  There  are  several  copies  of  this  paper  to  be  found  in  the  early  volumes  of  the 
Town  and  Proprietor's  Records,  diflfering  from  one  another  in  several  (for  the  most  part)  unim- 
portant particulars.  I  have  selected  that  which  was  fullest  and  seemingly  most  complete  and 
authentic. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKY.  11 

present  city,  the  roads  were  laid  out,  the  one  nmning north  and 
south,  sixteen  rods  "wide.*  This  was  cut  in  the  middle,  by  an 
east  and  west  road,  running  down  towards  the  river,  south  of 
Sled  Ilall  Brook,  eight  rods  wide.  There  was  another  cross- 
road at  the  south  end,  probably  near  the  present  highway  over 
the  hill  from  the  south  bridge.  The  home  lots,  eight  acres  in 
each,  according  to  the  articles  of  settlement,  were  ranged 
along  the  north  and  south  street,  thirty-two  in  number,  sixteen 
on  each  side,  the  east  and  west  road  already  referred  to,  divid- 
ing each  "  teer "  in  the  middle,  leaving  eight  lots  on  either 
hand. 

So  much  was  done  in  the  summer  and  fall  of  1674,  towards 
the  settlement  of  Mattatuck,  but  it  does  not  appear  that  any 
dwellings  were  erected.  For  some  cause,  not  fully  understood, 
the  progress  of  the  enterprise  was  suspended  at  this  point. 
Perhaps  the  country,  on  a  closer  examination,  did  not  prove  so 
attractive  as  it  had  been  represented.  In  the  following  year, 
however,  there  were  new  and  obvious  reasons  for  not  pushing 
forward  the  enterprise.  A  more  serious  and  pressing  business 
presented  itself,  demanding  attention. 

Early  in  the  summer  of  1675,  the  great  Indian  War  of  New 
England,  commonly  called  King  Philip's  War,  broke  out. 
Connecticut,  though  not  itself  attacked,  entered  with  spirit 
into  the  struggle.  Her  sons  left  their  husbandry  and  followed 
Treat  and  Talcott  to  the  scene  of  danger.  All  thoughts  of  new 
settlements  were  abandoned  and  many  of  those  recently  com- 
menced were  broken  up.  For  the  present,  the  policy  of  the 
colonies  was  to  concentrate  themselves  that  their  defense  might 
be  less  difficult.  It  was  a  fierce  and  bloody  war,  in  which 
the  parties  aimed  at  extermination.  It  was  more  destructive 
to  the  lives,  property  and  immediate  prospects  of  the  country, 
than  any  which  has  taken  place  since.  The  whole  weight  of 
it  fell  upon  New  England,  then  containing  about  forty  thou- 


*  Afterwards,  or  January  15, 16TT,  old  stj-le,  when  a  new  site  had  been  selected  and  approved 
for  the  town,  the  committee  passed  a  new  order  respecting  this  road,  as  follows  : — "  we  order  the 
highway  of  sixteen  rods  wide  that  is  already  layed  out  north  and  south  through  the  old  town 
platt  to  be  butt  two  rods  wide  and  grant  that  the  propriators  of  ecih  side  the  said  highway  to 
butt  upon  the  new  highway  for  enlargement  of  their  lots  proportionally." 


12  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUEY. 

sand  people,  (Connecticut  perhaps  ten  thousand,)  widely  dis- 
persed in  small  settlements,  and  destitute  of  almost  everything 
but  stout  hearts  and  a  trust  in  Heaven.  It  was  brought  to  a 
successful  termination,  without  any  assistance  from  the  mother 
country,  or  the  neighboring  colonies,  in  the  latter  part  of  1676, 
by  the  death  of  King  Philip,  an  able,  and,  in  many  respects,  a 
wise  chief. 

Who  among  those  who  subsequently  became  the  planters  of 
Mattatuck  were  personally  engaged  in  the  war  against  King 
Philip  and  his  confederates,  I  am  -unable  to  say.  I  find, 
however,  the  following: 

A  meeting  of  the  Coimcill  in  Hartford  Dec.  5,  1670. 

The  Councill  granted  John  Brunson  of  Farmington  the  sume  of  fine  pounds, 
as  a  reparation  for  his  wounds  and  damage  rec*.  thereby,  and  quarteridg  and  half 
pay  to  the  first  of  this  present  moneth.     [Col.  Rec.  II,  p.  483.] 

There  were,  at  this  time,  three  persons  bearing  the  name  of 
John  Bronson  living  in  Farmington,  John,  John  the  son  of 
John,  and  John,  Jr.,  the  son  of  Richard.  Probably  the  ex- 
tract refers  to  John,  the  son  of  John,  who  went  to  "VVaterbury, 
and  the  reward  was  for  injuries  received  in  the  war  just  closed. 
His  father,  though  an  old  Pequot  soldier,  was  now  doubtless 
too  old  for  active  service. 


CHAPTER    11. 


THE    SETTLEMENT    BEGUN:    TOWN    CENTER. 

In  the  spring  of  1677,  the  tranquillity  of  the  colony  being 
secured,  the  Farmington  people  began  once  more  to  think  of 
making  a  settlement  at  Mattatuck.  They  were,  however,  dis- 
satisfied with  the  place  selected  for  a  village  site.  Though 
attractive  from  its  sightliness  and  probable  healthfulness,  a 
closer  examination  brought  to  light  disadvantages  and  objec- 


HISTOKY    OF   WATEKBURY.  13 

tions  of  a  decisive  cliaracter.  The  many  broad  acres  which  it 
allowed  for  each  man's  home  lot  were  hardly  a  recompense  for 
its  rocky  sm-face  and  moderate  productiveness.  It  was  of  diili- 
cnlt  access  from  the  east.  It  could  be  reached  from  the  river 
lands  (from  which,  in  an  important  degree,  subsistence  was 
expected  to  be  drawn)  only  by  a  long  and  steep  ascent.  Be- 
sides, a  settlement  upon  the  west  side  of  the  river  would  be 
liable,  from  the  frequent  floods  which  covered  the  flats,  to  have 
its  communication  with  Farmington  cut  oflT.  For  the  present, 
Farmington  alone  would  connect  the  people  with  the  civili- 
zation of  the  day,  whence,  for  a  time,  must  be  obtained  many 
of  the  necessities  and  all  the  comforts  of  life.  There  lived 
their  friends,  and  there  they  would  look  for  refuge,  or  succor, 
in  case  of  a  hostile  attack  from  the  Indians.  There,  too,  for  a 
time,  they  must  resort  for  the  regular  ministrations  and  ordi- 
nances of  the  Gospel. 

In  pursuance  of  a  plan  entertained  by  those  most  interested 
of  changing  the  town  center,  a  meeting  of  the  proprietors  was 
held  and  a  committee  appointed  "  to  vew  and  consider  whether 
It  will  not  be  for  the  benefit,"  &c.  This  is  the  first  meeting  of 
the  ancient  proj)rietors  of  Waterbury,  of  which  we  have  any 
account.  I  infer,  from  the  date,  that  it  was  held  in  Farming- 
ton,  though  the  place  is  not  mentioned.  The  vote  passed  at 
this  meeting  is  recorded,  and  the  record  seems  to  be  original. 
It  is  the  oldest,  by  several  years,  of  the  Waterbury  Records. 
The  recorder  is,  apparently,  the  "  John  Standly,  Jr.,"  who  sub- 
scribed the  articles  of  settlement,  though  his  name  does  not 
appear — the  same  person  who  subsequently,  for  many  years, 
is  known  as  the  clerk  of  the  proprietors  and  the  town.  The 
vote  is  written  in  a  business-like  hand,  somewhat  brisker  than 
that  which  characterized  the  clerk's  performances  at  a  later  day. 
The  record  book  is  an  old,  dingy  manuscript,  of  foolscap  size, 
which  I  dug  out  of  a  mass  of  forgotten  rubbish,  found  in  a 
private  family.  The  sheets  are  sowed  through  and  through, 
in  the  middle,  by  a  cord  of  unnecessary  strength,  and  the 
whole  is  covered  by  coarse,  brown  paper  turned  over  at  the 
edge,  with  a  broad  margin  and  made  fast  with  a  thread. 
Many  leaves  are  gone  at  the  beginning  and  end,  and  those 


14  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

wliicli  are  left,  are  rent  and  broken  and  exceedingly  brittle 
when  handled.  Fifty  fonr  pages  only  remain.  This  is  the 
first  original  Proprietor's  Book,  now  in  existence.  Much  of 
its  contents  has  been  copied,  by  successive  clerks,  into  more 
recent  books.  The  same  has  been  done  with  the  other  earliest 
records,  and  the  originals  afterwards  scattered  and  lost. 
Care  has  been  taken  by  transcribing  to  preserve  the  evidences 
of  property,  particularly  land  titles  ;  but  other  matters  have 
been  regarded  as  of  little  account. 

The  following  is  the  vote  referred  to  in  the  preceding  para- 
graph :— 

At  a  metting  held  by  the  proprietors  of  mattatucke  may  the  twenty  first,  1&11, 
upon  furder  Considaration  of  some  difeculty  that  doth  atende  them  seting  the  towne 
whare  It  is  now  kid  out  theay  made  chois  of  deacon  Judd,  John  Langhton  sen' 
John  andrus  sean""  goodman  Rote  and  John  Judd  and  danell  porter  as  a  comite 
to  vew  &  Consider  whether  It  will  not  be  more  for  the  benefit  of  the  propriators 
In  Generah  to  set  the  towne  on  this  east  side  of  the  River  contenting  themselfes 
with  les  hom  lots  prouided:  those  formerly  laide  out  be  secured  to  them:  prouided 
also  they  thinke  &  conclude  It  so  to  be  to  aduis  with  the  grande  Comite  and  in 
conjunction  with  them  they  jine  with  liberty  so  so  doe  we  the  proprietors  agre  to 
act  Acordingly  not  withstanding  what  Is  alredy  done. 

As  the  result  of  these  movements,  favored  by  the  reason- 
ableness of  the  thing  itself,  the  Court's  committee  changed 
the  town  center  to  the  place  where  it  now  is,  the  planters 
"  contenting  themselfes  with  les  home  lots."  The  latter  seem- 
ed disposed  to  settle  as  near  as  possible  to  the  lands  from  which 
they  expected  to  draw  their  chief  sustenance.  In  consequence 
of  this  anxiety,  they  jeoparded  health  to  some  extent.  They 
erected  their  dwellings,  in  many  instances,  upon  ground  which 
was  wholly  unfit  for  building  purposes.  Just  at  the  center  of 
the  village,  the  land  was  low  and  wet,  and  in  some  instances, 
marshy,  and  covered  with  standing  water.  Even  within  the 
writers's  memory,  the  road  was  made  solid  by  logs,  laid  in 
"  corduroy  "  fashion,  and  cows  that  got  off  the  traveled  path 
sunk  deep  and  helplessly  in  the  yielding  mire.  As  the  conse- 
quence of  its  low  situation,  the  ancient  town  was  often  envel- 
oped in  fogs,  as  the  young  city  now  is.  A  part  of  the  sickness 
and  mortality  among  the  early  planters,  may,  perhaps,  be  attrib- 
uted to  damp  dwellings  and  an  unhealthy  locality.     Against 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKY.  15 

the  evils  of  these,  they  could  provide  but  a  slight  defense,  on 
account  of  their  straitened  circumstances. 

Our  fathers,  looking  to  agriculture  for  support,  did  not  select 
the  most  eligible  part  of  the  Naugatuck  Yalley  for  a  settlement. 
Indeed  they  could  hardly  have  fared  worse,  within  the  limits 
of  their  future  township.  Had  they  gone  up  or  down  the  river, 
and  planted  themselves  in  what  is  now  Plymouth,  or  Nauga- 
tuck,  they  would  have  found  better  land,  and  have  been 
in  the  former  case  no  farther  removed  from  their  friends  in 
Farmington.  It  is  true,  they  would  not  have  had,  perhaps,  as 
liberal  a  supply  of  meadow  lands,  ready  cleared  and  prepared 
for  tillage ;  but  these  proved,  in  the  end,  an  unsafe  depend- 
ence. Had  they  crossed  the  river  and  established  themselves 
in  present  Watertown,  they  would  have  found  a  good  soil  of 
superior  agricultural  capacity,  for  this  part  of  the  State.  Mid- 
dlebury,  too,  that  part  of  it  embraced  within  the  limits  of  the 
ancient  town,  though  rough,  has  much  strong  land.  But  there 
was  an  objection  to  a  locality  so  far  west,  with  the  Naugatuck* 
flowing  between  the  settlers  and  the  parent  towii,  which  has 
already  been  alluded  to. 

On  the  tenth  day  of  September,  1677,  the  committee,  being 
the  grantees  named  in  the  deed  from  the  Indians  conveying 
the  lands  of  Mattatuck,  nuide  over  all  their  title  and  interest 
in  the  same  to  the  proprietors  of  Mattatuck.  By  this  act,  liow- 
ever,  they  did  not  part  with  any  of  their  authority  in  the  man- 
agement of  the  settlement.  This  is  the  assigmnent,  signed 
by  John  Talcott,  only  : — 

The  aboue  writen  deed  of  sale  we  the  said  John  talcot  Nicholas  olmsted  and 
Samuel  Steel  do  this  tenth  of  September  in  the  year  1077  asign  and  mack  oucr  aU 
our  Right  and  tittle  therein  and  thereunto  vnto  Thomas  Judd  John  Stanly  Samuell 
hickoks  and  Abraham  brunson  inhabitants  of  mattatuck  to  themselus  heirs  and 
asigns  for  euer  and  to  the  rest  of  the  inhabitants  belonging  to  the  said  mattatuck 
for  them  selves  and  their  heirs  and  asigns  for  ever  as  wittness  our  hands  the  said 
inhabitants  having  payd  the  purches  to  our  order  the  purchesers 

Lieut  Webster  being  dead  before  our  Asign 

Signed  and  delivered  by  us  John  Talcott 


*  Naugatuck— in  the  Indian  lan^age,  N'avkotunl\  one  large  tree — is  said  to  have  been  the 
original  name  of  Iluraplireysville,  (Seymour;)  so  called  from  a  large  tree  which  formerly  stood 
near  Rock  Kimmon  at  Seymour.    (Barber's  Con.  Uist.  Col.) 


16  niSTOKY    OF   WATERBUEY. 

Soon  after  this  assignment,  or  in  October  next  following, 
the  committee  in  the  exercise  of  their  approj^riate  functions, 
"  ordered  "  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  new  plantation  "shonld 
settle  near  together  for  benefit  of  Christian  duties  and  defense 
against  enemies."  They  also  modified  at  a  little  later  date, 
some  of  the  conditions  of  settlement,  in  consequence  of  the  un- 
expected delay  which  had  taken  place  in  the  movement  of 
the  emigrants.  I  quote,  the  date  being  Jan.  15th,  16Y7,  (16Y8, 
new  style)  :* 

We  doe  allso  alow  the  propriators  of  mattatuck  one  yere  for  settleing  them 
•  selues  on  [in]  the  aforesaid  mattatuck  more  than  was  first  granted:  not  withstand 
ing  any  thing  to  the  contrary  and  all  publick  charges  to  be  borne  one  yer  longer 
or  more  than  is  concluded  in  the  third  article  datted  may  30"'  1611 

From  various  circumstances,  it  would  seem  that  the  first 
settlers  came  to  this  place  some  time  in  the  summer  of  1677, 
bnt  at  what  precise  date,  I  have  been  unable  to  ascertain.  At 
any  rate  they  were  here  on  the  tenth  of  September,  as  appears 
by  the  assignment  of  the  Indian  deed  to  certain  persons,  "  in- 
habitants of  Mattatuck."  They  came  without  their  families,  and 
erected  some  rude  huts,  for  temporary  shelter,  on  the  banks  of 
the  river,  near  Sled  Hall,  so  called.  Having  pnt  in  their  winter 
crops,  and  made  some  preparations  for  the  ensuing  spring,  most 
of  them  probably  returned  to  Farmington,  as  the  cold  weather 
came  on.  In  the  spring  following,  some  of  the  proprietors  remov- 
ed their  families  to  their  new-found  homes,  and  went  to  work. 
And  serious  work  they  had  to  do.  But  they  were  inured  to 
it.     Their  hands  were  hardened  by  toil,  and  their  hearts  made 

*  The  old  year  began  March  25th.  Between  16S5  and  1690,  the  subject  was  first  agitated  of 
making  a  change,  and  commencing  the  year  Jan.  1st.  During  this  interval,  some  used  old 
style  and  others  new  style.  After  1690,  the  custom  obtained,  when  giving  a  date  from  Jan.  1st 
to  March  25th,  of  adding  the  new  year  to  the  old,  in  the  form  of  a  double  date.  Thus  Feb.  5, 
1710,  old  style,  (which  would  be  Feb.  5,_1711,  new  style,)  was  written  Feb.  5,  17^.  The  custom, 
however,  was  not  entirely  uniform.  Some  began  the  year  on  the  1st  of  March,  and  on  (and 
after)  that  day  employed  the  new  style.  Our  clerks  were  very  careless,  following  no  certain 
rule.  Mr.  Southmayd  sometimes  uses  the  double  date,  sometimes  old  style  and  sometimes 
new  style.  More  usually,  he  employs  new  style  for  dates  occurring  any  time  in  March.  On  the 
14th  day  of  March,  1752,  it  was  enacted  by  Parliament  that  the  year  should  commence  on 
the  1st  day  of  January.  By  the  same  act,  eleven  days  were  struck  out  of  the  month,  and  the 
third  was  called  the  fourteenth,  to  correct  an  error  arising  from  the  "  procession  of  the  equi- 
noxes." In  this  work,  when  referring  to  specific  dates,  I  shall  observe  the  custom  of  the  eras 
concerning  which  I  write,  making  at  the  time  such  explanation  as  may  be  necessary. 


HISTORY    OF    WATEEBURT.  IT 

brave  by  successful  encounter  with  difficulty  and  danger. 
They  were  neither  drones  nor  cowards.  They  were  tough  men, 
and  had  come  into  a  tough  country — a  country  which,  for  easy 
tillage,  was  in  striking  contrast  with  the  plains  of  Farmington. 
Though  prepared  for  unceasing  toil  and  much  sacrifice,  they 
probably  did  not  expect  the  prolonged  hardship,  the  great  dis- 
couragements, and  fearful  calamities  which  kept  the  popula- 
tion of  the  colony  stationary  for  more  than  thirty  years. 

In  the  course  of  the  summer  of  1678,  a  few  houses  were 
erected  on  the  newlj'^  selected  site  for  the  village.  They  were 
constructed  of  logs,  after  the  fashion  of  the  new  settlements  of 
the  present  day,  with  the  naked  ground,  or  in  some  cases,  if 
the  soil  was  wet,  or  the  occupants  were  persons  of  taste  and 
substance,  with  split  logs,  for  a  floor.  They  were  "  good  and 
substantial  dwellings,"  doubtless,  ("  mantion  houses,"  they 
were  sometimes  called,)  "'at  least  eighteen  feet  in  length  and 
sixteen  feet  wide,  and  nine  foot  between  joynts  with  a 
good  chimly  "  of  stone  and  clay  mortar,  according  to  the  re- 
quirements of  the  subscribed  articles;  but  they  were  not 
what,  at  this  day,  would  be  called  fashionable.  They  might 
have  been  picturesque,  provided  the  spectator  stood  far  enough 
off.  We  shall  be  obliged  to  guess  how  they  were  furnished; 
but  I  risk  nothing  in  saying  tliat  they  contained  no  tapestry 
carpeting  or  lace  curtains.  They  in  fact  were  designed  for 
shelter,  not  ornament.  According  to  tradition,  there  were,  at  a 
later  period,  forty  of  these  rude  log-houses,  standing  at  one 
time,  in  the  town  center. 

The  village  streets  were  laid  out,  in  the  commencement, 
very  nearly,  in  most  cases,  where  they  still  are — three  running 
east  and  west,  something  more  than  half  a  mile  long,  and  three 
shorter  ones  running  north  and  south,  the  four  outside  streets 
forming  an  irregular  oblong  square,  the  east  being  more  than 
twice  as  broad  as  the  west  end.  The  west  street  on  the  map 
of  Waterbury,  published  in  1852,  is  called  Willow  street;  the 
east.  Mill  street  and  Cherry  street ;  the  north.  Grove  street,  and 
the  south.  Grand  street  and  Union  street ;  while  the  central 
streets  are  named,  one  West  and  East  Main,  and  the  other 
Bank,  North  Main  and  Cook  streets.     No  new  roads  of  much 

2 


18  HISTOKY    OF   WATEKBURY. 

importance  liave  been  laid  outnntil  about  the  commencement  of 
the  present  cen  tury.  That  part  of  Cook  street,  however,  which 
lies  between  Main  and  Grove  streets,  previously  to  1703, 
ran  farther  west  than  at  present.  It  must  have  wound  round 
between  the  hills  west  of  Lyman  W.  Coe's  house,  coming  into 
Grove  street,  probably  a  few  rods  west  of  the  present  junction, 
where  the  Brunt  Hill  road  (Cook  above  Grove)  commences. 
It  passed  west  far  enough  to  leave  a  house  lot  of  four  acres, 
owned  by  Benjamin  Warner,  between  the  road  and  the 
brow  of  the  hill  just  east  of  the  Little  Brook,  near  the  house 
owned  by  Andrew  Bryan.  In  the  conveyances  of  this  four 
acre  lot  after  it  went  out  of  the  possession  of  "Warner,  it  is  de- 
scribed as  in  two  pieces,  the  larger  one  butting  east,  and  the 
smaller  west,  on  the  highway.  The  town  action,  relating  to 
this  new  road  up  the  Brook  is  seen  in  the  following  extract  from 
the  town  record  : 

January:  25"^:  1702-3  y^  town  with  benimin  worner  exchanged  y*  highway  on 
y6  west  s^  worners  hous  lot  next  beniamin  barns  to  let  s"*  worner  haue  y'  hiway 
for  a  three  rods  highway  throu  his  lot  on  y®  hill  sid  on  y^  east  s^  his  lot  next  y« 
litle  brook  and  s"*  worner  is  to  extend  southword  in  ye  frunt  of  his  lot  to  y^  sixt 
porst  of  beniamin  barnses  fenc  y'  is  now  set  and  to  extend  northward  in  y®  deui- 
dent  loyn  next  barns  as  fur  as  s*"  barnses  lot  gos  and  to  run  to  his  own  north  east 
conr  not  to  pergedis  [&c.] 

Probably  when  the  town  was  planned  and  the  highways 
staked  out,  there  was  no  road  contemplated  in  the  place  of  that 
which  runs  diagonally  from  Mr.  Coe's,  past  Charles  D.  Kings- 
bury's to  the  east  end  of  Grove  street ;  but  subsequently,  and 
before  long,  its  convenience  became  apparent.  It  is  mention- 
ed in  connection  with  the  grant  of  George  Scott's  (after- 
wards Benjamin  Warner's)  liouse  lot,  in  December,  1687,  and 
referred  to  "  as  the  highway  that  runs  over  the  Little  Brook." 
After  this  road  was  nuide,  the  thought  of  a  new  and  better 
road  north,  up  the  brook,  doubtless  suggested  itself. 

The  road  w^hich  now  runs  from  Bank,  across  South  Main, 
and  up  Union,  to  the  top  of  the  hill,  being  a  continuation  of 
Grand,  seems  not  to  have  existed  in  the  early  history  of  the 
town.  This  appears  from  the  descriptions  of  the  home  lots  on 
the  easterly  side  of  Bank  street,  which  were  bounded  west, 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBUKY.  19 

but  not  north  or  south,  on  highway.  South  Main  street,  so 
called,  was  laid  out  and  made  as  a  countrj  road,  not  till  after 
1800 ;  but  there  was,  from  an  early  date,  a  passage,  called  the 
Pine  Hill  road,  from  the  south  end  of  Bank  street,  near 
wliere  Meadow  street  commences,  running  southeasterly  in 
the  general  direction  of  Meadow  street,*  within  the  common 
fence,  to  the  Mad  River  crossing,  near  the  present  bridge,  and 
so  on  to  Judd's  Meadow,  (Naugatuck.)  A  branch  from  this 
passage,  communicatingwith  what  is  now  Union  street,  and  the 
corn  mill,  (Scovill  Manufacturing  Go's  Rolling  Mill,)  extended 
northeasterly,  bounding  in  the  rear,  or  on  the  southeast,  some 
of  the  Bank  street  home  lots  above  mentioned. 

I  have  been  unable  to  find  (as  already  suggested)  any  refer- 
ence at  an  early  date,  to  what  is  now  Union  street,  from  Bank 
to  Elm.  I  have  not  identified  it  as  bounding  any  of  the  home 
lots,  or  any  grants  of  land.  And  yet,  it  was  probably  includ- 
ed in  the  original  plan  of  the  village.  A  road,  or  path,  such 
as  I  have  referred  to  in  the  preceding  paragraph,  connecting 
the  corn  mill  with  the  Pine  Hill  road  running  down  the  river, 
was  required  for  the  convenience  of  the  people.  I  obtain  no 
certain  knowledge  of  it,  however,  till  March  13th,  1730,  when 
a  highway  was  laid  out,  (which  has  been  closed  within  the  last 
thirty  years,)  beginning  near  the  top  of  the  hill,  a  little  west  of 
Elm  street,  "  a  little  below  Hopkins'  Plain  bars,  from  that 
highway  that  runs  by  the  common  fence,  to  that  that  goes  to 
Judd's  Meadow,"  at  a  stake  on  the  brow  of  the  hill,  in  the 
corner  of  Thomas  Porter's  lot,  running  across  said  lot  south- 
wardly fourteen  rods,  then  seven  rods,  "  at  the  bottom  of  the 
hill  within  Deacon  Clark's  fence,  where  it  empties  into  said 
highway  that  goes  to  Judd's  Meadow,  two  rods  wide."  It 
came  out  near  Charles  Bronson's  house.  It  was  to  be  a  "  pent 
road,"  that  is,  to  be  closed  at  its  upper  end  with  a  gate  or  bars. 
Its  object  appears  to  have  been  to  shorten  the  distance  to  the 
mill,  for  the  southern  and  southwestern  inhabitants. 

Probably  the  survey  above  referred  to  is,  for  the  most  part, 


*  The  passage  referred  to,  at  the  time  the  turnpike  was  made,  (1801,)  came  into  the  latter  near 
the  house  of  John  M.  Stocking,  (on  the  map.) 


ZU  HISTORY    OF    WATEEBURY. 

only  a  resiirvey  of  an  old  road — tlie  same  wliicli  has  been  allud- 
ed to  as  extending  in  the  rear  of  the  Bank  street  home  lots,  bound- 
ing them  on  the  east.  Union  street,  within  the  present  century, 
came  into  South  Main  from  the  east,  farther  north  than  now, 
at  a  point  nearly  opposite  the  continuation  of  Grand  street. 

Mill  street,  below  the  old  mill,  which  thirty  years  ago  ran 
close  to  the  river,  down  to  the  place  occupied  by  the  Hotchkiss 
&  Merriman  Manufacturing  Go's  Factory,  did  not  exist  at 
an  early  period.  The  lot  between  the  mill-dam  and  the  river 
crossing,  bounded  easterly  on  the  river,  in  1718.  Abraham 
Andruss'  house  lot  next  the  river,  below  the  crossing,  bounded 
on  the  river  in  1687  and  1704. 

The  following  extract  relates  to  that  part  of  Mill  street 
which  runs  from  the  old  corn  mill  to  East  Main  street,  by 
George  W.  Welton's  house : — 

Water  bury  March  y«  9"»  1720  we  whose  name  are  under  writen  ware  formerly 
apointed  aecomety  with  leftenante  Judd  by  the  town  of  Waterbury  to  lay  out  high- 
ways to  the  mill  in  persuante  thare  too  we  laid  out  a  high  way  from  the  Rode  that 
goes  to  farmingtown  opposite  against  the  south  easte  corner  of  the  hous  lot  that 
is  now  thomas  hikcox  so  to  the  mill  foure  rods  wide  at  that  ende  next  be  fore 
mentioned  rode  and  something  wider  towards  the  mill  buting  east  upon  doctor 
porters  land  and  west  upon  the  land  that  Stephen  hopkins  hous  now  stands  on 

Benjamin  Barnes 

mark  Comety 

Stephen     2     Ubson  Sen. 
his 

From  another  and  earlier  record,  it  would  seem  that  the 
above  was  a  re-survey  of  an  old  highway,  or  else  that  the 
committee  previously  appointed  to  lay  it  out  neglected  to  do 
it.  A  copy  of  the  record  is  given  below.  The  old  road  re- 
ferred to,  w^hich  was  to  be  changed,  bore  off  more  to  the  east 
than  the  present  one. 

Desember  8  1712  de  [deacon]  thomas  Judd  abraham  andrus  s'  Stuen  upson 
was  chosen  a  commity  to  run  a  hi  way  north  from  the  mill  between  John  hopkins 
and  doc  danll  porter  in  order  to  chang  it  for  land  on  west  sid  the  mill  plan  of  s^ 
hopkins  and  mak  return  to  the  town 

"  The  mill  path,"  so  called  in  the  early  records,  now  Cole 
street,  which  runs  obliquely  from  East  Main  by  Mrs.  Zenas 
Cook's  house  (on  the  map)  to  the  mill,  was  not  apparently  an 


I 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUKT.  21 

original  street,  though  it  existed  from  an  early  period.  I  find 
it  first  alluded  to  in  1694,  in  connection  with  John  Richards' 
house  and  honse  lot. 

I  believe  there  is  no  early  mention  made  of  that  part  of 
Cherry  street  which  runs  north  and  south,  except  incidentally. 
In  December,  172-i,  the  town  granted  John  Bronson  liberty  to 
run  the  lines  by  his  house  in  a  certain  manner ;  but  he  was 
"  to  leave  a  high  way  six  rods  wide  against  his  house."  His 
house  (then  the  only  one  upon  the  street)  stood  just  north  of 
Solomon  B.  Miner's,  (on  the  map.)  Cherry  street,  at  that 
point,  was  once  much  wider  than  now. 

The  upper  end  of  Cherry  street,  that  portion  of  it  which 
runs  westerly  across  the  Great  Brook  and  terminates  at  North 
Main,  was  laid  out  by  Daniel  Southmayd,  Dec.  1st,  1746, 
though  doubtless  it  existed  as  a  passage  long  before.  It  is 
described  as  "  a  highway  at  the  upper  end  of  Lt.  John  Bron- 
son's  saw  mill  lot,  beginning  at  the  highway  that  goes  by  said 
Bronson's  new  barn,  tlie  first  corner  being  at  James  Nichols' 
southeast  corner,  which  is  the  first  corner  of  the  highway, 
running  west  twenty  one  rods  to  said  Nichols'  southwest 
corner,  which  is  the  northwest  corner  of  said  liighway,  bounded 
north  on  said  Nichols'  land,  three  rods  wide,  the  bounds  being 
on  the  north  side." 

Grove  street  was  surveyed  or  re-surveyed,  in  two  parts, 
Dec.  21,  1752.  The  east  part  began  at  Deacon  Thomas  Bron- 
son's  clay  pit  pasture,  (corner  of  North  Main  and  Grove  streets,) 
and  ran  west  thirty-two  rods  to  the  southwest  corner  of  Isaac 
Nichols'  Little  Brook  pasture,  terminating  at  the  road  that 
"  goes  north  from  Obadiah  Worner's  barn  to  Robert  Johnsons 
house,"  (Cook  street  continued.)  It  was  four  rods  wide.  The 
west  part  began  at  the  highway  last  mentioned  "  at  the  South 
East  corner  of  William  Adams  lot,"  and  ran  west  one  hund)-ed 
and  sixteen  rods  "  to  the  highway  that  goes  by  Serg.  Thomas 
Barnes  house,"  (Willow  street.)     It  was  three  rods  wide. 

This  highway  doubtless  existed  from  the  beginning  of  the 
settlement.  The  original  home-lots  on  West  Main  street  were 
bounded  on  it  on  the  north. 

Church  street  was  laid  out  May  5th,  1S06.  It  ran  south 
forty  rods  and  was  two  rods  wide. 


22  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUET. 

The  following  action  of  the  grand  committee  related  to  East 
Main  street. — (Joseph  Gaylord  lived  on  the  north  side  of  the 
street,  on  the  corner  of  North  Main.) 

Farmington  November  27  1619:  A  meeting  of  the  comitte  for  mattatuck  Itt  is 
determined  that  high  way  layed  out  by  Lt.  Samuell  Steele  att  the  east  end  of  the 
town  plat  att  mattatuck  running  eastward  out  of  said  town  plat  being  thre  rod 
wid  shall  always  be  and  remain  for  publick  and  common  vse  which  is  between 
Joseph  Gaylords  lott  and  a  hous  lott  reserved  for  such  inhabitants  as  shall  her- 
after  be  entertained 

I  have  given  above  all  which  I  have  been  able  to  gather, 
concerning  the  old  highways  comprehended  in  the  original 
plan  of  the  town  center.  There  is  nothing  on  record  regard- 
ing tlie  most  ancient  roads  as  they  were  first  laid  out.  What- 
ever we  know  is  obtained  from  the  re-surveys,  incidental  re- 
marks and  the  very  imperfect  memoranda,  and  often  erroneous 
descriptions  of  the  home  lots,  and  the  early  land  grants,  w^hich 
"  butted  "  on  highways. 

In  Feb.  1702-3,  it  was  ordered  by  the  town  "  that  the  high- 
ways layd  out  be  recorded :"  but  this  order  appears  to  have 
been  wholly  neglected  till  1716. 

The  home-lots  of  the  first  settlers  of  Mattatuck  were  upon 
the  central  streets,  most  of  them  on  that  running  east  and  west, 
a  few  on  the  one  running  north  and  south.  The  lots  on  the 
outside  streets,  and  those  that  were  situated  most  distant  from , 
the  center,  were  taken  up  at  later  dates,  as  there  was  occasion 
for  them.  They  were  staked  out  by  the  committee,  and  those 
first  disposed  of,  distributed  by  lot,  in  the  way  the  old  town 
plot  lots  were  designed  to  be,  without  reference  to  amount  of 
proprietorship.  They  varied  in  size  according  to  the  desirable- 
ness of  the  locality,  and  "  the  make  of  the  ground,"  natural 
disadvantages  being  compensated  by  additional  acres.  A 
majority  of  them  contained  two  acres,  but  some  had  four,  one 
five,  and  others  only  one  and  a  half  acres.  Some  eligible  lots 
were  reserved,  and  many  outside  ones,  not  so  desirable,  w^ere 
left  for  future  settlers.  These  were  disposed  of  by  grant — by 
the  committee,  at  first,  and  subsequently  by  the  j)i"oprie- 
tors. 

Around  the  "  Green,"  (Centre  Square,)  on  all  sides  and  so 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUKY.  23 

west  as  far  as  the  house  of  the  late  Bennet  Bronson,  the  houses 
were  numerous,  the  hand  having  been  all  taken  up  and  built 
upon,  except  a  tract  near  the  present  Episcopal  Church,  The 
lots  on  the  south  side  of  the  road,  except  one  at  the  east  end, 
and  those  on  the  north  side,  except  four  at  the  east  end,  extend- 
ed through  to  the  back  streets.  Previously  to  about  1700, 
there  were  no  dwellings  east  of  Dr.  Jesse  Porter's,  north  of 
C.  D.  Kingsbury's,  south  of  a  house  on  Bank  street,  marked 
on  the  map,  "  Timothy  Ball,"  and  west  of  the  late  B.  Bron- 
son's.  On  the  plan  of  the  old  town  center,  I  have  entered  the 
names  of  the  first  settlers.  When  the  block  is  omitted,  it  is  to  be 
understood  that  no  house  is  expressly  mentioned,  (in  some  cases 
from  inadvertence,  probably,)  as  existing  on  the  lot. 

There  are  no  land  records  of  Waterbury,  attempting  descrip- 
tion, that  bear  date  earlier  than  1687,  immediately  after  the 
incorporation  of  the  town.  The  lands  granted  by  the  Assem- 
bly's committee  were  not  recorded  at  the  time ;  and  those 
which  were  afterwards  distributed  by  the  proprietors,  in  pub- 
lic meetings,  are  not  defined,  except  in  the  most  general  terms. 
For  instance,  in  1684,  the  proprietors  granted  to  Daniel  Porter 
"  four  acers  in  y^  wigwam  swamp  as  near  y^  loer  end  as  may 
be  so  as  to  liaue  the  breath  [breadth]  of  y«  swamp."  But  in 
the  year  named,  (1687,)  something  more  was  attempted.  A 
record  was  made  of  each  man's  lots,  and  particularly  of  his 
house  lot.  This  was  made  both  in  Hartford  (on  the  colony 
records)  and  in  "Waterbury.  The  description  is  of  the  brief- 
est sort,  and  in  the  most  general  terms.  Boundaries  are  given, 
and  the  estimated  number  of  acres  ;  and  whether  the  title  was 
obtained  by  purchase,  or  special  grant.  If  a  deed  had  been 
taken,  the  date  of  the  signing  and  acknowledgment  is  given, 
with  the  name  of  the  commissioner,  or  justice.  These  record- 
ed and  very  brief  accounts,  are  afterwards  referred  to  as  evi- 
dence of  title.  On  these  chiefly,  I  have  been  obliged  to  rely 
in  my  attempts  to  locate  the  early  planters  of  Waterbury, 
They  are  often  so  indefinite,  so  lacking  in  detail,  so  erroneous 
indeed,  that  it  is  a  matter  of  the  utmost  difiiculty  to  make 
anything  out  of  them.  Distances  are  very  rarely  given,  and 
points  of  compass,  never,  except  in  the  most  general  way. 


24  HISTOEY    OF   WATEKBURT. 

East  is  sometimes  inadvertently  used  for  west,  and  north  for 
south,  and  vice  versa.  Tlie  settlers  often  bought  and  sold,  and 
exchanged  houses  and  lots,  and  this  circumstance  has  increas- 
ed the  diificulty  of  ascertaing  the  earliest  dwelling  places  of 
individuals. 


CIIAPTEE    III. 


DELINQUENT     SUBSCRIBERS. 


Of  the  thirty  original  subscribers  to  the  articles  of  settle- 
ment, thirteen  never  became  permanent  proprietors  of  Water- 
bury.     Tlieir  names  follow : 

John  Warner,  Sen., 
Daniel  Warner, 

John  Andruss, 
Abraham  Bronson, 
Thomas  Gridlet, 
John  Porter, 
Richard  Seymour. 

William  Higason, 
Samuel  Gridley, 
John  Lankton, 
John  Judd, 
Samuel  Judd, 
William  Judd. 

John  Warner,  Sen,,  and  Daniel  Warner,  father  and  son, 
whose  names  are  in  the  first  group,  both  intended  to  join  the 
planters  of  Mattatuck,  but  died  when  about  to  remove,  in  1679, 
in  Farmington.  The  place  of  the  father  seems  to  have  been 
filled  by  his  son,  Thomas  Warner ;  while  the  death  of  the  son 
gave  rise  to  the  following  action  of  the  committee,  which  con- 
ferred his  rights  upon  his  widow. 


HISTOKY    OF    AVATERBUKY.  iiO 

Farmington,  November  26,  1679, 
Where  as  Daniel  Worner  with  his  Family  were  upoa  the  Remove  to  Mattatuck, 
And  on  that  Juncture  of  time  the  Divine  providence  of  God  hath  Removed  the 
S^  Daniell  out  of  the  Land  of  the  Land  of*  the  Living.  Out  of  compassion  to 
his  Relict  &  children  left  behind  him,  we  do  Grant  the  s**  Relict  shall  hold  her 
Allottments  Firm  and  Good  to  her  self  and  children  not  with  standing  any  thing 
Contained  In  any  Former  Article  to  the  Contrary,  only  advising  her  Self  and  Re- 
latives that  a  Dwelling  house  be  Erected  there  with  all  possible  Speed,  and  that 
Shee  Inhabit  there  or  some  sufficient  person  to  manage  he[r]  Lands  &  accommo- 
dations upon  the  place. 

By  us 

John  Talcott 
John  Wadsworth 
Nicholas  Olmstead 
Samuel  Steel 
A  true  Record  of  the  Original 

Attest  John  Southniayd,  Clerk. 

It  appeared  early  that  there  were  several  of  the  original  sign- 
ers of  the  articles  who  had  changed  their  minds,  and  had  no 
longer  any  intention  of  becoming  permanent  settlers  of  Matta- 
tuck. They  made  a  declaration  to  this  effect,  and  the  com- 
mittee permitted  other  applicants  to  take  their  places, 
Tliere  were  five  of  these  persons  who  abandoned  the  enterprise 
at  the  outset,  or  in  the  first  season,  16TT,  before  any  houses 
were  erected.  No  more  than  one  of  these  is  heard  of  as 
having  been  with  the  first  planters  of  this  town.  Their 
names  are  in  the  second  giouj). 

John  Andruss.  Benjamin  Jones  was  accepted  as  a  proprie- 
tor, in  his  stead.  The  name  will  again  be  mentioned  in  con- 
nection with  his  son,  Abraham,  an  early  settler.  He  was  one 
of  the  committee  of  the  proprietors,  appointed  May  twenty- 
first,  1677,  to  take  into  consideration  the  expediency  of  remov- 
ing the  town  site. 

Abraham  Bronson  was  a  younger  brother  of  John  and  Isaac 
Bronson,  original  signers  and  settlers.  He  was  one  of  the  as- 
signees named  in  the  assignment  of  the  first  Indian  deed  to 
certain  persons,  "  inhabitants  of  Mattatuck."  Tliis  was  Sept. 
10,  1777 ;  so  that  he  would  seem  to  have  been  one  of  the  first 

*  So  in  the  Record. 


26  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUKT. 

company  of  planters.     But  he  sickened  of  the  enterprise,  and 
his  place  was  filled  Jan.  15,  1677-8,  by  John  Scovill, 

Thomas  Gridley,  of  Farmington,  was  a  son  of  Thomas  Grid- 
le}'^  of  Hartford  and  Farmington,  and  brother  of  Samuel,  an- 
other signer.  His  name  is  among  those  of  the  "  eighty-four 
Proprietors  of  Farmington,"  in  1673.  He  was  born  1650,  and 
died  in  1742.  The  vacancy  made  by  his  failure  was  supplied 
by  Joseph  Gaylord,  Jan.  15th,  1677-8. 

John  Porter,  of  Farmington,  was  probably  a  son  of  Robert, 
a  subsequent  settler  and  proprietor.  David  Carpenter  was 
accepted  for  him,  Jan.  15tli,  1677-8.  The  family  will  again 
be  mentioned. 

Richard  Seymour,  of  Farmington,  was  a  son  of  Richard 
Seymour,  of  Hartford,  Farmington  and  Norwalk.  He  was 
the  leader  of  the  settlement  which  was  made  at  the  Great 
Swamp,  (afterwards  Kensington,)  to  which  place  he  removed 
in  1685.  He  was  killed  by  the  falling  of  a  tree  in  1710.  His 
wife  died  in  1712.  His  sister  Mercy  married  John  Steel,  the 
father  of  Ensign  Samuel  Steel,  one  of  the  State's  Committee ; 
and  his  sister  Mary  married,  in  1644,  Thomas  Gridley,  another 
signer.  Benjamin  Barnes  was  accepted  in  his  place,  Jan.  15th, 
1677,  (1678,  new  style.) 

The  six  persons  in  the  third  group  all  had  meadow  allot- 
ments and  divisions  of  the  common  fence  assigned  them,  at, 
different  times,  from  1678  to  1681  ;*  and  from  this  circum- 
stance it  is  rendered  probable  that  they  were,  for  a  time  at 
least,  residents  at  Mattatuck,  with  a  prospect  of  securing  their 
proprietary  rights  and  becoming  permanent  settlers. 

William  Higason.  His  name  is  on  the  list  of  proj^rietors 
of  Farmington,  1672.  He  was  born  in  1648,  and  had  several 
children — Sarah,  Margaret,  Elizabeth,  Mary.  The  last,  mar- 
ried Clark  Carrington,  a  son  of  John,  an  original  propri- 
etor of  Waterbury.  Edmund  Scott,  Jr.,  was  accepted  for  him 
and  took  his  allotments,  about  1680. 

Samuel  Gridley,  a  "  smith "  and  "  trader,"  was  a  son  of 


*  The  four  first  divisions  of  fence,  of  which  a  record  has  been  preserved,  were  made  between 
these  dates. 


niSTOEY   OF   WATEfiBURY.  27 

Thomas,  and  elder  brother  of  Thomas  above  mentioned.  He 
M^as  born  in  1647,  and  died  1712,  having  had  eleven  children. 
Thomas  Newell,  Sen.  was  made  a  proprietor  in  his  place,  prob- 
ably before  1680. 

John  Lankton,  or  Langdon,  was  a  deacon  of  the  church  in 
Farmington.  He  was  one  of  the  committee  raised  in  May, 
1677,  to  inquire  into  the  propriety  of  removing  the  town  site. 
He  was  a  son-in-law  of  Thomas  Gridley,  had  several  children, 
and  died  in  1689.  His  rights  as  proprietor  of  Mattatuck  were 
declared  forfeited,  "  Feb.  5"^,  1680,"  and  were  afterwards  con- 
ferred on  John  Hopkins,  the  miller. 

John  Judd  and  Samuel  Judd,  were  sons  of  Dea.  Thomas 
Judd,  of  Farmington,  to  be  hereafter  mentioned.  They  neg- 
lected to  comjjly  with  the  articles  of  settlement,  and,  after  a 
long  indulgence  on  the  part  of  the  committee,  their  allotments 
were  "  condemned,"  Feb.  6th,  1682.  (1682-3.)  The  commit- 
tee accepted  of  Abraham  Andruss,  2d,  or  Jr.,  in  the  place  of 
John  Judd ;  and  at  a  later  period,  1687,  Samuel's  right  was 
bestowed  on  his  brother  Philip. 

William  Judd  was  an  elder  brotlier  of  John  and  Samuel, 
above  mentioned — a  man  of  substance,  of  much  influence 
and  greatly  esteemed.  He  was  the  most  distinguished  of  the 
Judds,  and  promised  to  be  the  leading  man  among  the  plant- 
ers of  Mattatuck  He  is  usually  called  Sergeant  William 
Judd,  he  having  been  confirmed  sergeant  of  the  Farmington 
train  band  by  the  County  Court  of  Hartford,  Dec.  4th,  1679. 
He  was  one  of  a  committee  to  apportion  the  fence  among  the 
proprietors,  appointed  Jan.  15th,  1677-8,  and  was  selected  for 
a  similar  service,  March  11th,  1678-9.  At  the  same  date,  he 
was  chosen,  in  company  with  Lieut.  Steele  and  John  Stanley, 
to  lay  out  "  the  three  acre  lots  "  to  the  settlers,  and  was  allow- 
ed the  privilege  of  having  his  own  lot  laid  out  adjoining  his 
house  lot.  From  the  nature  of  the  duties  assigned  liim,  and 
the  way  he  is  spoken  of,  I  conclude  that  he  was  an  inhabitant 
of  Mattatuck  at  the  dates  mentioned,  with  the  intention  of 
remaining ;  but  some  how  the  time  allowed  for  building,  &c., 
ran  out,  and  on  complaint,  he  along  with  other  delinquents, 
was  declared,  under  date  of  "Feb.  5th,  1680,"  to  have  for- 
feited all  his  rights.     Here  is  the  action  of  the  committee : 


28  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

In  consideration  of  some  of  those  persons  that  haue  had  alotments  granted  Att 
mattatuck  we  haue  heard  the  alygations  layed  in  against  them  and  doe  determin 
that  deacon  John  langton  william  Judd  and  dauid  carpenter  haue  forfited  all  their 
rights  and  tittles  to  those  alotments  granted  to  them  att  mattatuck  not  hauing  at- 
tended [to]  those  articles  to  which  thay  haue  subscribed. 

Afterwards,  however,  "William  Judd's  name  again  appears 
as  a  subscriber  to  the  articles,  he  obligating  himself  to  erect  a 
dwelling,  and  to  settle  in  the  place,  with  his  family,  within 
one  year  after  subscription.  May  18th,  1680,  he  was  at  the 
head  of  a  committee,  on  the  part  of  Mattatuck,  to  settle 
bounds,  with  Derby,  and  a  little  later,  June  9th,  1680,  to  set- 
tle bounds  with  Woodbury.  A  second  time,  however,  he  was 
a  defaulter,  and  at  length,  his  lands  and  rights  of  land  were 
given,  by  the  proj^rietors,  to  his  son  Thomas.  His  name  dis- 
appears from  the  record  after  1681.  His  house  lot  appears 
to  have  been  on  Willow  street,  a  little  north  of  the  dwelling 
of  the  late  Bennet  Bronson. 

Of  those  who  signed  the  articles  after  a  settlement  had 
been  commenced,  live  got  faint  hearted,  or  for  some  other 
reason,  failed  to  secure  their  projjriety  rights.  They  are  nam- 
ed below.  All  had  meadow  allotments  and  divisions  of  fence 
except  the  first. 

Thomas  newell  s*° 
Joseph  Andruss 
David  Carpenter 
Benjamin  Judd 
John  Root 

Thomas  Newell,  Sen.,  was  an  original  settler  of  Farming- 
ton,  and  the  father  of  John  and  Thomas  Newell,  proprietors. 
He  was  one  of  the  petitioners  to  the  General  Court,  in  1673, 
for  liberty  to  plant  a  colony  in  Mattatuck ;  but  there  is  no 
evidence  that  he  took  any  steps  in  the  way  of  forwarding  the 
enterprise  after  subscribing  the  articles.  The  "Thomas  New- 
ell" whose  name  appears  about  1679  as  having  fence  assigned 
him  to  build,  appears  to  have  been  his  son,  who  took  his  place 
and  became  a  jiroprietor. 

Joseph  Andruss,  I  suppose  to  have  been  the  fourth  son  of 
John  Andruss  of  Farmington,  another  signer,  and  younger 
brother  of  Abraham  Andruss,  a  proprietor.     I  know  nothing 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY.  29 

ol  him  except  that  he  had  a  meadow  allotment,  and  a  divis- 
ion of  fence  assigned  him  in  1080. 

David  Carpenter.  There  were  two  persons  by  this  name 
in  Farmington,  father  and  son.  The  above  is  presumed  to 
have  been  the  son.  He  was  born  in  1647,  and  married  Han- 
nah, a  daughter  of  Richard  Bronson  of  Farmington.  He  was 
accepted  as  a  proprietor,  Jan.  15th,  1677-8,  in  the  place  of 
John  Porter,  but  his  right  was  not  declared  forfeited  till  Feb. 
5,  1680-1.     He  removed  to  ]^ew  London. 

Benjamin  Judd  probably  subscribed  the  articles  and  joined 
theplantersofMattatuck,  within  the  first  year  of  the  settlement. 
He  was  a  brother  of  "William,  John  and  Samuel,  and  a  son  of 
Dea.  Thomas  Judd,  of  Farmington.  Jan.  15th,  1677-8,  he  was 
appointed  "  to  call  out  the  proprietors  in  their  turns  to  mend 
the  highways."  Feb.  6th,  1680-1,  he  was  selected  by  the 
committee  to  lay  out  land  which  was  granted  to  the  mill.  At 
the  same  date  he  was  allowed  an  addition  to  his  propriety  so 
2s  to  "mack  it  in  valeu  of  one  hundred  pounds,"  and  land 
was  granted  him  as  follows: 

Also  we  doe  grant  Benjamin  Judd  shall  haue  added  to  the  north  end  of  his 
House  Lott  some  land  to  build  one  always  prouided  that  the  highway  that  runeth 
through  the  Towne  in  towne  in  that  place  shall  be  and  remain  four  rods  and  a  half 
wide  to  be  layd  out  to  him  by  the  forsaid  persons. 

At  a  later  period,  he  signed  a  petition  addressed  to  the 
committee,  "  in  reference  to  herding  of  cattell,"  which  was 
answered  April  5th,  1682-3.  Before  the  date  of  this  answer, 
however,  (Feb.  6th,  1682-3,)  his  allotments  were  all  "  con- 
demned" for  not  building  according  to  articles,  &c.  But  a 
year  afterwards,  Jan.  10th,  1683,  he  was  allowed  the  "  prive- 
ledg  of  reseasing"  (entering  again  into  the  possession  of)  his 
allotments,  on  the  conditions  prescribed  by  the  "act  of  Feb. 
6th,  1682,"  which  required  a  residence  of  "  full  four  yers  in  a 
stedy  way  and  manor,"  with  his  family.  After  this  he  is 
heard  of  no  more  in  Mattatuck. 

John  Root  was  the  son  of  the  John  "  Eoote  senr.,"  who  sub- 
scribed and  was  accepted  "  in  behalf  of  one  of  his  sons,"  Jan. 
15,  1677-8.  The  father,  called  "goodman  Rote,"  was  one  of 
the  committee,  in  1677,  to  take  into  consideration  the  expe- 


30  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY. 

diency  of  changing  tlie  village  site.  As  to  the  son,  his  name 
is  among  those  who  had  a  division  of  fence  in  1680,  but  he  is 
spoken  of  no  more.  He  removed  to  Westfield,  (Mass.,)  and 
died  in  1687. 

There  were  then  eighteen  persons  (including  the  two  who 
died)  who  signed  the  articles — thirteen  in  1674,  and  five  in 
1677  and  subsequently— who  failed  to  make  good  their  pro- 
prietary rights. 

The  following  passage  shows  the  way  in  which  vacancies 
happening  among  the  proprietors  were  filled  by  the  com- 
mittee : 

Att  a  meeting  of  the  Comity  for  mattatuck  January  15,  16*77  Itt  was  agread 
and  concluded:  that  we  doc  accept  of  John  Roote  seno""  subscribing  to  the  arti- 
cles for  Settling  of  mattatuck  in  the  behalf  of  one  of  his  sons  and  we  accept  of 
John  Scouall  on  the  Ace*  of  Abraham  Bronson  and  benjamin  barnes  on  account 
of  Richard  Seymour  and  of  John  Stanly  Junior  Joseph  Gaylor  on  the  account  of 
Thomas  Gridley  [they]  subscribing  to  submit  to  the  articles  aforsaid  dated  may  30*  •" 
1674  and  in  soo  doing  are  excepted  as  inhabitants  of  the  place  dauid  Carpenter 
subscribing  in  behalf  of  John  Porter  is  excepted  upon  the  same  terms 

Below  will  be  found  what  purports  to  have  been  copied 
from  "the  back  side  of  the  leaf  where  the  original  articles 
were  filed."  The  new  proprietors,  of  course,  were  required 
to  take  upon  themselves  the  obligations  of  the  old.  The 
names  of  some  of  them  are  here  met  with. 

We  whose  names  are  here  under  written  do  ingage  to  stand  by  and  fullfiU  the 
Articls  within  written  acording  to  the  tru  intent  and  meaning  in  all  Respects  aS 
witness  our  hands 

Thomas  newil  Seno'  on  the  account  of  Sam  Gridly 

Benjamin  Barnes  Thomas  newill  Sc 

John  Scoval  his  Tmark 

John  Stanly  Junor  for  Joseph  gaylor 
Benjamin  Joans  on  the  acount  of  John  Andrus 

Edmund  Scott  Juno''  his  c^  Benjamin  Joans 

mark  for  william  higasonc2  . ,     >  .     , 

°  oj  Abraham  Andruss 

,  in  rome  of  John  Judd 

William  Judd  has  his  allotment(^^ 

granted  to  him  by  the  comitee      \o  William  Judd 

according  to  their  act  feb^  5  leSuV* 

Steven  upson  subscribes  on  the  account  of  a  new  lott  this  29  of  December 
1679. 

The  mark  of  Steven  /  upson 


i 


HISTOKY   OF   WATEBBUEY 


31 


CHAPTER    IV. 


SUBSCRIBERS  WHO  FINALLY  SECURED  THEIR  RIGHTS. 

The  number  of  persons  wlio  signed  the  articles  subsequently 
to  1674,  and  who  ultimately  became  proprietors,  is  nineteen, 
making  with  the  seventeen  on  the  list  of  1674  who  made 
good  their  rights,  thirty-six.  I  give  below  a  complete  cata- 
logue of  their  names,  throwing  them  into  several  groups, 
placing  the  groups  in  the  order  in  wdiich  the  individuals  are 
known  (or  are  supposed)  to  have  subscribed  the  articles  and 
complied  with  the  conditions  they  imposed.  Those  of  the  two 
first  groups  signed  in  1674 ;  those  of  the  third  in  1677-8  ; 
those  of  the  fourth  about  1679;  those  of  the  fifth  between  1682 
and  1 705.  The  persons  who  have  a  star  prefixed  to  their  names 
had  not  made  good  their  claims  as  proprietors,  in  Feb.  1682-3. 


Thomas  Judd, 

£100 

*Thomas  Warner, 

£100 

Edmund  Scott, 

100 

Widow  Warner, 

60 

John  Welton, 

80 

*Thomas  Newell, 

90 

Abraham  Andruss, 

80 

Edmund  Scott,  Jr., 

70 

Isaac  Bronson, 

90 

Stephen  Upson, 

50 

John  Stanley, 

100 

Benjamin  Jones, 

100 

Samuel  Hikcox, 

85 

*Abraham  Andruss,  2d, 

100 

Joseph  Hikcox, 

60 

John  Bronson, 

80 

John  Hopkins, 

100 

John  Warner, 

90 

Thomas  Judd,  Jr., 

100 

John  Newell, 

100 

[Robert  Porter, 

100] 

Samuel  Scott, 

50 

*Thomas  Hancox, 

100 

Richard  Porter, 

50 

*Thomns  Richason, 

50 

Thomas  Judd  (smith,) 

100 

*John  Carrington, 

60 

Philip  Judd, 

80 

*Obadiah  Richards, 

80 

John  Richards, 

80 

*Timothy  Stanley, 

95 

Jeremiah  Peck, 

150 

*Daniel  Porter, 

90 
100 

John  Southmayd, 

150 

Benjamin  Barnes, 

£3,130 

*Joseph  Gaylord, 

80 

*John  Scovill, 

80 

32  HISTORY    OF    WATERBUET. 

The  name  of  Timothy  Stanley,  in  the  above  catalogue,  oc- 
cupies the  place  of  "  Sergt.  John  Stanley  for  son,"  in  the  ori- 
ginal subscription  list,  he  appearing  to  take  possession  of  the  al- 
lotment thus  subscribed  for  by  his  father.  In  the  same  way, 
Daniel  Porter  (the  son)  and  John  ISTewell  (the  son)  stand  in 
the  places  of  "  Daniel  Porter  for  son,"  and  of  "Thomas  Newell 
for  son."  Thomas  Judd,  John  Stanley,  John  Bronson,  and 
John  Warner,  all  signers  of  1074,  have,  in  each  case,  Jr.  at- 
tached to  their  names  in  the  original  list,  they  having  fathers 
bearing  the  same  name.  After  they  became  inhabitants  of 
Mattatuck  the  Jr.  was  omitted,  and  at  length,  when  their 
sons  had  grown  up,  they  were  called  Sen..,  in  each  instance, 
except  that  of  Stanley.  Robert  Porter's  name  is  omitted  (for 
what  reason  I  know  not)  from  all  the  lists  of  proprietors  made 
out  after  1688.  But  as  he  is  on  that  list,  owned  a  house  and 
lived,  and  finally  died,  in  Waterbury,  in  1GS9,  he  would  seem 
to  have  complied  with  the  conditions  of  a  proprietor.  Besides, 
after  his  death,  his  son  Thomas  sold  his  lands,  and  in  1700,  his 
£100  propriety,  to  John  Richards,  proving  his  rights  had  not 
been  forfeited.  We  might  suppose  that  Richards  name, 
which  appears  not  till  after  the  death  of  Porter,  was  intended  to 
occupy  the  place  of  the  latter,  were  it  not  for  the  fact  that  the 
proprieties  of  the  two  are  different,  that  of  Richards  being 
but  £80. 

The  following  passage  relates  to  the  acceptance  of  Thomas 
Judd,  Jr.,  as  a  j)roprietor : 

Hartford  Jan  10'''  1683  [1683-4]  Thomas  Judd  Jun'  is  acepted  as  an  inhab- 
itant att  Mattatuck  his  father  thomas  Judd  having  signified  his  desires  of  the 
game  he  the  sayd  Thomas  Judd  Junor  subscribing  to  the  act  and  order  of  the 
comity  feb  the  6  1682  ******  itt  being  determined  by  us  the  com- 
ittee  in  case  any  grant  or  any  grants  be  made  by  the  inhabitants  of  mattatuck  to 
thomas  Judd  Junor  in  refarence  too  posesion  of  Any  parsols  or  tracts  of  land  it  is 
hereby  made  void:  and  of  none  effect  not  with  standing  anything  to  the  contrary 

Samuel  Scott  was  made  a  proprietor  soon  after,  receiving 
probably  a  part  of  a  grant  to  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  "made  void" 
by  the  preceding  act  of  the  committee. 

Matatuck  Decembe  y^  30  1684  y«  town  granted  to  Samuel  Scott  half  y=  alot- 
ment  formerly  granted  to  thomas  Judd  junr  with  y'  exception  of  four  acres  to  be 


■^t^/z/;7^ 


'a^  u^/:iyvaM /;7^/ 


IIISTOKY    OF    WATEKBURY.  33 

taken  out  of  y*  a  lotment  [for  a?]  great  lot — and  a  deuition  of  meadow  with  y« 
Rest  of  y®  propriators  in  y«  next  deuition  of  meadow  land  according  to  a  fifty 
pownd  a  lot[ment]  with  y®  hous  lot  an  y^  south  sd  of  Stephen  ubson  with  thea 
prouisals  y'  he  build  a  hous  according  to  articles  within  four  yeirs  and  Hue  here 
after  his  hous  be  build  and  pay  y«  purchas  of  a  fifty   pound  lot 

Samuel  Scott's  name  disappears  from  tlie  list  of  proprietors 
after  1088,  that  of  Jonathan  Scott  occupying  its  place,  the  lat- 
ter having  bought,  April  28th,  1601,  the  house  and  all  the 
lands  divided  and  undivided,  of  his  brother,  in  Waterbury. 

It  seems  there  was  some  doubt  about  the  proprietary  rights 
of  Stephen  Upson,  Richard  Porter  and  Jonathan  Scott.  This 
doubt  was  finally  the  origin  of  a  declaratory  act  in  1702-3, 
which  seems  to  have  settled  the  question : 

At  a  meeting  of  y«  propriators  in  waterbury  february  22*''  1702  y«  propriators  de- 
clare y'  y^  propriators  for  y^  first  purchasing  of  y*  place  and  such  as  stand  pos- 
sesed  of  alotments  according  to  y®  gran  comitya  act  with  Stephen  ubson  Richard 
porter  and  Jonathan  scott  whos  alotments  ware  excepted  of  y«  commity  as  a  fifty 
pownds  a  lot  ment  apeic  shall  be  acknowledged  propriatory  inhabitants  and  to  act 
in  giuing  a  way  lands  in  s-J  propriatory  ship  and  for  y«  futor  no  more  to  act  in  y" 
propriators  meeting  then  one  for  a  singell  alotment 

Several  of  the  signers  had  the  amount  of  propriety  for  which 
they  at  first  subscribed  (given  above)  increased,  on  applica- 
tion, by  the  committee.  Here  are  extracts  from  the  record  re- 
lating to  Isaac  Bronson's  and  Samuel  Hikcox's  rights.  (Ben- 
jamin Judd,  it  will  be  remembered,  forfeited  his  claim.) 

Upon  further  considaration  we  haue  hereby  granted  benjamin  Judd  and  Isaac 
brownson  shall  haue  so  much  uplands  aded  to  their  alottments  as  shall  mack  their 
raedow  alotments  in  valew  of  one  hundred  pounds  and  that  adition  to  be  aded  to 
their  respectiue  eight  acre  lotts  already  granted     feb.  6  1G80 

Att  a  town  meeting  in  mattatock  decern  29""  1682 :  there  was  granted  to  sam'^ 
hickox  an  adition  to  his  alotment  so  much  land  as  shall  make  up  his  lot  to  be  a 
hundred  pouncf  alotment  and  this  addition  to  be  aded  to  his  eyght  acer  deuition 
y®  com    te  [committee]  granting  y®  same 

Tlie  rights  of  Daniel  Porter  and  Timothy  Stanley  seem  also 
to  have  been  augmented,  each,  £5 ;  but  I  am  unable  to  say 
when.  Doubtless  it  was  done  by  grant  of  the  committee. 
The  whole  increase,  in  this  way,  was  £35. 

3 


34:  HISTORY    OF    WATEEBUET. 

It  will  be  recollected  that,  in  the  articles  of  settlement,  the 
committee  reserved  to  themselves  the  right  "  to  lay  out  two 
or  three  allotments  at  their  best  discretion."  Tliis  they  exer- 
cised by  setting  apart,  in  the  beginning,  three  proprieties  of 
£150  each,  for  the  common  benefit — "for  public  and  pious 
uses," — particularly  for  the  maintenance  of  religion,  and  the 
promotion  of  education.  These  were  called  "great  lots," 
("greate  lotes,"  on  the  record.)  Two  of  them  were  given 
to  Mr.  Peck  and  Mr.  Southmayd  as  they  were  settled  suc- 
cessively in  the  ministry. 

A  declaratory  act  was  passed  in  1715,  relative  to  Jeremiah 
Peck's  right,  as  follows : 

The  Proprietors  did  conclude  that  Mr.  Jeremiah  Peck  our  former  Minister  in 
his  hfe  time  was  Invested  with  one  hundred  &  fifty  Pound  propriety. 

The  sum  of  all  the  subscriptions  of  the  thirty-six  persons  in 
the  above  list,  was  £3,130.  There  were  additions  made  after 
subscription  to  the  rights  of  certain  individuals,  as  already 
stated,  in  all  of  £35,  which  sum  added  to  the  other,  makes  a 
total  of  £3,165.  Of  this  amount  there  was  subscribed  in  1674, 
by  thirty  persons,  and  afterwards  represented  by  them,  or  by 
those  who  were  accepted  in  equal  numbers,  in  their  places, 

the  sum  of .         .      £2,580 

There  was  added  to  this  "  a  new  lot "  for  Stej)hen 

Upson,  Dec.  29,  1679,  the  sum  of  -        -        -        50 

For  Isaac  Bronson's  addition,  ....  lo 

For  Samuel  Ilickox's  addition,  -         -         -         -         15 

For  Daniel  Porter's  addition,  .         _         .         _  5 

For  Timothy  Stanley's  addition,  .         .         _         .  5 

For  Samuel  Scott's  "  half  an  allotment,"  -        -        -  50 

For  Richard  Porter  the  other  half,  probably,  of  the  same,  50 
For  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  probably  a  new  allotment,  -  100 
For  Mr.  Peck  and  Mr.  Southmayd,  £150  each,         -  300 


£3,165 
As  a  general  rule,  a  propriety  once  subscribed  for,  and  se- 
cured by  a  compliance  with  the  articles,  went  in  the  name  of 
the  original  signer.     If  a  person  sold  out  a  part,  or  the  whole 


inSTORY    OF    WATERBUKY.  35 

of  his  riglit,  or  if  lie  died  and  liis  interest  was  distributed 
among  his  heirs,  the  propriety  was  kept  together  on  the  record 
and  stood  in  the  name  of  the  first  owner.  If  a  man  had  a 
claim,  derived  from  others,  he  mnst  show  that  he  obtained  his 
title  by  regular  conveyance  from  the  original  owner.  Rights 
in  the  undivided  lands  were  transferred  like  other  real  estate 
by  deeds,  warrantee,  or  quit  claim.  A  man,  for  instance,  sold 
a  £5  or  £10  right  or  propriety,  and  the  deed  was  recorded,  the 
record  being  evidence  of  title. 

There  are  a  few  instances,  however,  in  which  the  name  was 
changed  on  a  change  of  ownership.  When  Thomas  Judd, 
Sen.,  died  in  1702-3,  his  £100  right  went  into  the  possession 
of  his  son  John,  and  John  Judd's  name,  ever  after,  is  entered 
in  the  place  of  his  father's.  Benjamin  Jones  died  in  1689, 
and  Capt.  Thomas  Judd,  in  1715,  purchased  his  right.  From 
tliat  date,  Thomas  Judd  appears  twice  in  the  successive  lists  of 
proprietors,  once  as  "  Tliomas  Judd,"  and  again  as  "Thomas 
Judd  Jones,"  while  Benjamin  Jones  is  heard  of  no  more. 
Again,  the  original  Tliomas  Judd,  Jr.,  conveyed,  in  1721,  to 
Samuel  Hall  of  Wallingford,  his  propriety.  After  that,  the 
right  goes  in  the  name  not  of  Samuel  Hall  Judd,  (according  to 
the  rule  in  the  preceding  case,)  nor  of  Samuel  Hall,  but  of 
"Thomas  Judd,  Jr.  Halls." 

The  above,  three  in  number,  are  all  the  alterations  of  names 
which  resulted  from  a  change  of  ownership,  (unless  John 
Richards'  name  was  substituted  for  Robert  Porter  in  conse- 
quence of  such  a  change.)  And  in  adopting  these,  it  will 
be  observed,  no  uniform  rule  was  followed. 

Tlie  subscribers  to  the  articles  were,  in  the  beginning,  the 
joint  owners  of  all  the  lands  of  the  town,  each  having  as 
many  shares  or  "  rights,"  so  to  speak,  as  he  subscribed  pounds. 
A  person  in  the  first  instance,  might  subscribe  for  any  sum, 
not  exceeding  a  £100  allotment,  according  to  article  II,  thus 
securing,  within  certain  limits,  such  proportional  interest  as 
he  pleased.  This  limitation  was  designed  to  prevent  specula- 
tion, and  to  restrain  individuals  from  obtaining  too  much 
land.  The  committee  wished  to  secure  actual  settlers,  and  as 
far  as  consistent,  equality  of  condition  and  possessions.     The 


36  HISTOKT    OF   WATERBUET. 

sum  of  all  the  subscriptions,  as  tliey  at  first  stood,  was  £2,580, 
or  twenty-five  hundred  and  eighty  shares.  Each  person,  then, 
who  had  a  £100  propriety,  had  a  title  to  one-twenty-sixth  part 
(within  a  fraction)  of  all  the  undivided  lands  in  the  township. 
The  admission  of  new  proprietors,  or  additions  to  the  rights 
or  shares  of  the  old  signers,  of  course  diminished  the  propor- 
tion of  each  one  whose  propriety  had  remained  unaltered- 
By  augmenting  the  number  of  proprietors  one-fifth,  or  rather 
by  increasing  the  number  of  shares  nearly  one-third,  a  pound 
right  came  to  have  a  greatly  reduced  land  value.  The  cost 
of  the  original  purchases  of  the  Indians  was  borne  by  share- 
holders, according  to  each  man's  interest.  Expenses  incurred 
for  the  common  benefit,  were  defrayed  by  the  same  rule. 
Roads  and  fences  to  inclose  the  common  field,  were  built  by  a 
tax  on  shares.  Article  ni  required  that  all  public  charges,  in 
the  first  years  of  the  settlement,  should  "  be  paid  proportiona- 
bly  to  meadow  allotments,"  and  "  meadow  allotments  "  were 
proportioned  to  propriety. 

Each  settler  was  to  have,  in  the  commencement,  according 
to  the  articles,  eight  acres  for  a  home  lot.  These  eight  acre 
lots,  as  has  already  been  stated,  were  at  first  "  located  "  on 
the  old  town  plot ;  but  as  the  town  center  was  changed, 
there  was  at  that  time  no  occasion  to  do  more,  and  they  were 
not  regularly  laid  out  and  surveyed,  till  1730.  As  there  were 
not  lots  enough  for  all,  a  few  of  the  original  subscribers,  and 
all  the  most  recent  ones,  had  to  take  their  lots  somewhere 
else.* 


*  "  Nov.  29, 1 726.  It  was  by  vote  a  greed  that  if  the  Committee  for  the  Old  Town  platt  Lotts  Cant 
find  all  the  Old  Town  platt  Lotts  for  «1I  the  Original  Proprietors,  those  that  are  Wanting  may 
have  Liberty  to  take  them  up  in  the  Undivided  Lands."    Pro.  Book,  p.  80. 

The  record  of  the  laying  out  and  distribution  of  these  lots  is  particularly  interesting,  because 
it  furnishes  the  first  authentic  list,  as  far  as  it  goes,  of  the  original  proprietors  of  Waterbury. 
There  are  ihirty  names,  it  will  he  noticed,  corre.«ponding  with  the  number  who  first  signed  the 
articles.  If  a  signer  had  forfeited  his  right,  his  name  is  omitted,  and  that  of  a  substitute,  who 
had  complied  with  the  conditions,  is  inserted.  There  is  one  exception,  however.  David  Car- 
penter's name  is  here,  though  he  did  not  "fulfill."  I  don't  know  why  it  is  found,  and  am  unable 
to  say  who  took  his  place.  lea.  Judd's  name  is  entered  twice,  once,  I  suppose,  for  Benjamin 
Jones,  whose  propriety  he  bought  in  1715.  Lieut.  Timothy  Stanley's  name  is  also  inserted  twice, 
once  c-oubtless  for  that  of  somebody  whose  right  he  had  purchased.  Of  the  two  "great  lots," 
one  was  for  schools  and  the  other  for  the  minister.  The  latter  went  to  Mr.  Peck.  These  last 
lots  swell  the  whole  number  to  thirty-two. 

"A  list  of  the  House  Lotts  on  the  Old  Town  Platt  Set  out  by  a  Committee  Lieut.  Timothy  Stan- 


niSTOEY   OF   WATEEBURY.  37 

Tlie  new  house  lots  were  distributed  in  the  same  way,  each 
proprietor  being  entitled  to  one,  the  choice  being  determined 
by  lot.  "  A  three  acre  lot  for  pasture,"  seems  also  to  have 
been  granted  by  the  committee,  in  the  beginning,  to  each  set- 
tler. This  appears  not  from  direct  evidence,  but  from  allu- 
sions like  the  following,  under  date  of  March  11th,  1678-0. 

And  itt  is  ordered  that  Lieut  samuel  Steele  Willuni  Judd  and  John  Stanly  Jun"" 
Lay  out  to  the  proprietors  their  thre  acre  lotts  that  are  granted  to  them  accord- 
ing to  former  agreement. 

It  appears  that  in  addition  to  the  above,  each  proprietor 
had  eight  acres  (called  his  "  eight  acre  lot  ")  granted  him  by 
a  vote  of  the  committee,  Feb.  6tli,  1682-3 : — 


ly,  Doctr  Daniel  Porter  Senr  &  Deacon  Thos  Hickcox.    We  began  on  the  West  Teer,  at  the  south 
End  and  found  as  follows  : — 


1.     John  Brounsons  Lott 

Then  we  begun  at  the  South  End  of  the  East 

2.     Edmund  Scotts,  Lott 

Teer  &  found 

3.     Isaac  Brounsons  Lott 

1. 

Deacon  Judds                      Lott 

4.    Samuel  Hickcox  senr.  Lott 

2. 

David  Carpenters                  — 

5.     Doctr  Porters                 — 

3. 

Abraham  Andrus                   — 

6.    A  Great  Lott 

4. 

Lieut.  Judds                            — 

7.     A  Great  Lott 

5. 

Edmund  Scotts  Senr              — 

8.     John  Warner                  — 

6. 

Lieut.  Timo  Stanleys             — 

Then  an  Eight  Road  highway  South  of 

7. 

Abraham  Andruss,  Cooper  — 

Warners  Lott  that  Runs  East  and  West 

8. 

Benjm  Barnes                          — 

as  the  Lotts  lye, 

9. 

Thomas  Newel's                     — 

9.    Thomas  Richardsons  Lott 

Tlien  Eight  Rods  highway  to  Run  East  &  West 

10.    Joseph  Hickcox             — 

or  as  the  Lotts  lie 

11.     Lieut.  Tirao  Stanleys    — 

10. 

Obadiah  Richards  Lott 

12.    John  Newells                  — 

11. 

Thomas  Warners    — 

13.    Benjra  Jones                   — 

12. 

John  Scovils             — 

14.    Lieut.  John  Stanleys     — 

13. 

John  Carringtons    — 

1.1.    Deacon  Judds                — 

14. 

John  Weltons           — 

16.    John  Hopkins                — 

15. 

Daniel  Warners       — 

16. 

Thomas  Juds           — 

The  several  Lotts  in  the  East  Teer  Butt  west  on  highway. 

The  several  Lotts  in  the  West  Teer  Butt  East  on  highway. 

found  by  the  Committee 

Daniel  Porter 
Thomas  Hickcox 
Timothy  Stanlbv." 

The  old,  familiar  names  which  we  do  not  find  in  this  catalogue,  are  those  of  Thomas  Hancox, 
who  signed  in  1674,  (but  who  afterwards  forfeited  his  rights  and  was  obliged  to  take  his  chance 
as  a  new  subscriber,)  and  of  Joseph  Gaylord,  who  signed  in  1677-8,  and  of  several  others  who 
became  proprietors  at  a  later  period — Stephen  Upson,  Ricliard  Porter,  Philip  Judd,  Jonathan 
Scott,  John  Richards,  John  Southmayd  and  John  Judd,  the  last,  however,  being  represented  in 
the  list  by  Lieut.  Judd.  All  these,  I  suppose,  omitting  the  last,  had  to  go  to  the  undivided  lands 
for  their  eight  acre  lots. 


38  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

Itt  is  Granted  that  ecth  propriator  as  addisonal  to  ther  former  grants  shall  ecth 
inhabitant  haue  eight  acrs  pr  man  layed  out  to  them  in  such  places  within  their 
towne  bounds  as  the  inhabitants  shall  agre  to  be  layed  out  by  persons  chosen  by 
the  inhabitants  of  the  place. 

These  several  parcels  of  land,  then — the  town  plot  eight 
acre  lots,  the  new  home  lots,  the  three  acre  lots  for  pasture,  and 
the  eight  acre  lots  of  1682-3 — were  distributed,  at  the  outset, 
without  reference  to  propriety.  With  these  exceptions,  and 
also  with  the  exception  of  certain  special  grants  hereafter  to  be 
referred  to,  the  lands  of  Waterbury  were,  from  time  to  time, 
as  there  was  need  of  them  for  improvement,  distributed 
among  the  proprietors  in  the  way  of  division.  The  land  thus 
obtained  was  called  an  allotment,  and  the  same  term  was  ap- 
plied to  the  proprietory  right,  or  the  right  of  allotment. 
These  divisions  were  nothing  more  than  dividends  on  shares, 
usually  so  many  acres,  or  so  many  parts  of  an  acre,  on  each 
pound  propriety.  There  was  occasionally,  particularly  in  the 
early  years  of  the  settlement,  a  moditication  of  the  rule  which 
commonly  gave  some  advantage  to  the  small  stockholders,  or 
proprietors.  The  divisions  were  repeated  at  intervals,  till 
there  was  nothing  more  to  divide,  or  till  the  entire  township 
passed  into  the  hands  of  individuals.  The  first  one  was  made 
at  the  time  the  settlement  was  commenced,  under  the  direc- 
tion of  the  committee,  when  the  meadows  were  distributed, 
or  the  "meadow  allotments"  taken  up.  The  first  made 
by  authority  of  the  proprietors  themselves,  was  in  1688,  and 
the  last  in  1801. 

The  proprietors,  as  has  already  been  mentioned,  disposed 
of  their  lands  by  division,  except  in  the  cases  in  which  reasons 
were  supposed  to  exist  for  special  grants.  That  the  division 
might  be  equitably  made,  it  was  the  practice  to  draw  lots  for 
a  choice  of  lands.  He  who  drew  number  one,  was  to  have 
the  first  choice,  having  liberty  to  select  from  any  of  the  lands 
proposed  to  be  distributed.  He  who  drew  number  two,  had 
the  second  choice,  and  so  on.  A  person's  chance  was  his  lot, 
and  the  thing  acquired  (the  land)  was  also  his  lot.  After  the 
order  of  choice  had  been  determined,  a  certain  day,  distant 
enough  to  allow  time  for  examinino-  the  lands  and  making:  a 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  39 

selection,  was  specified,  on  wliicli  the  laying  out  was  to  com- 
mence. Running  on  from  this  fixed  time,  eacli  proprietor 
was  to  have  a  day  determined  by  his  lot  drawn,  (sometimes 
two  were  to  have  two  days,)  on  which  he  might  take  up  his 
lands  and  have  them  surveyed  by  the  town  measurers.  It  he 
neglected  to  do  this,  in  the  time  allowed,  he  must  wait  till  all 
the  others  had  had  their  turns.  In  some  instances,  in  order 
to  equalize  the  chances,  or  compensate  for  good  or  ill  luck, 
the  land  to  be  drawn  for  was  divided  into  two  equal  parcels, 
with  a  distinct  lot  for  each,  (two  draughts^  the  record  says.) 
The  first  was  drawn  in  the  way  described.  In  the  second  lot, 
he  who  had  the  first  chance  in  the  first  drawing,  now  had  the 
last,  and  he  who  before  had  the  last  now  had  the  first,  the 
order  of  choice  being  reversed.  Certain  regulations  and  re- 
strictions were  established,  at  dilferent  times,  designed  to 
govern  action  in  taking  up  the  lands,  and  to  secure  the  com- 
mon weal,  by  preventing  an  abuse  of  privileges. 

The  following  extracts  indicate  the  steps  that  were  taken 
preparatory  to  the  proprietors'  first  land  division  of  1688  : 

Att  a  town  meeting  in  mattatuck  decern  30  (1G84)  the  town  determined  that 
there  should  be  adiuition  of  all  y«  undeuided  meadow  to  each  propriator  accord- 
ing to  his  meadow  allotment  former  grants  exsepted 

Dec  31  1684  y®  town  mad  choys  of  serg  Judd  sam"  hikcox  and  Johnstandlya 
commity  to  uew  and  prepare  al  y*  undeuided  meadow  for  allotment  *  *  *  it 
was  determined  y'  each  man  should  haue  y*  charg  of  laying  out  hys  lot 

Geneuary:  3^  1686  y^  town  declare  y«  worck  of  y*  commity  chosn  deem  30"* 
(1G94)  [1684]  namely  srg  judd  sr  standly  &  sani"  hickox  was  to  uew  and  pre- 
pare all  ye  undeuided  meadow  up  y^  great  Riuer  and  up  Steels  brook  and  hancox 
brook  and  all  y^  branches  up  y^  Riuer. 

I  have  been  unable  to  ascertain  how  much  land  there  was 
distributed  in  this  division.  At  any  rate,  there  was  not 
enough  to  be  foimd  in  the  places  indicated  up  the  river  and  up 
Ilancox's  and  Steel's  Brook,  to  give  a  full  proportion  to  all 
the  proprietors,  so  that  several  had  to  take  a  part  of  their  al- 
lotments somewhere  else. 

This  division  bears  date  April  ITtli,  1688.  I  transcribe  the 
record  which  gives  a  list  of  the  proprietors  who  were  congern- 
ed  in  this  land  distribution.     It  is  the  earliest  formal  list  now 


40  HISTORY    OF    WATEEBUKY. 

extant,  made  out  after  the  town  was  incorporated,  and  under 
circumstances  which  give  it  authority.  It  is  interesting  and 
important.     The  amount  of  propriety  is  not  stated. 

Timothy  Standly  Robard  porter 

Stephen  ubson  thomas  Judd  jun' 

Samuell  Scott  Richard  porter 

daniel  porter  Mr  fraysr 

thomas  Warner  smith  judd 

John  brunson  obadiah  richards 

isaac  brunson  daniell  warner 

John  welton  John  standly 

edman  scott  juner  John  wornor 

Tho  nuell  John  nuell 

jn  hopkins  John  scouell 

ben  barns  John  carrinton 

benjoanes  thomas  hancox 

Thomas  Richason  philipjudd 

Joseph  gaylard  abraham  andrus  senor 

Sam' '  hikcox  Ensign  Judd 

edman  Scott  senor  abraham  andruss  junr 

Here  are  thirty-four  names,  two  less  than  the  full  number, 
at  a  subsequent  period.  Who  Mr.  Frayser  was,  I  know  not. 
His  name  is  not  found,  in  any  other  instance,  upon  the  record. 
It  may,  temporarily,  have  been  substituted  for  that  of  Joseph 
Hickox,  who  had  removed  and  recently  died.  Possibly 
Frayser  was  Ilickox's  executor  or  administrator.  We  miss 
in  this  catalogue,  Joseph  Hickox  and  John  Kichards.  Doubt- 
less Richards  had  not  yet  become  a  proprietor.  I  have  al- 
ready stated  that  he  purchased  Robert  Porter's  right,  and  that 
we  ought  to  suppose  that  he  afterwards  stood  in  his  place, 
were  it  not  for  a  discrepancy  in  the  amount  of  their  propri- 
eties. 

K  we  deduct  two  from  this  list,  and  add  two,  and  then 
again  add  Mr.  Peck  and  Mr.  Southmayd,  afterwards  made 
proprietors,  we  complete  the  catalogue,  having  thirty-six  in 
number. 

The  next  land  division,  so  far  as  can  be  gatliered  from  the 
records,  was  in  1691-2.  The  following  passage  is  all  I  can 
find  relating  to  it.     It  is  taken  from  the  old,  unboimd  Propri- 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  41 

etors'  Book,  page  20tli,  and  it  is  in  tlie  liand  of  Jolm  Stan- 
ley :— 

Att  a  meeting  of  the  propriators  in  Watterbury:  march  the  15  1692^  there  was 
granted  :  to  ecth  propriator  :  inhabetant  a  deuition  of  outlands  of  ten  acres  to  a 
hundred  pound  alotment  and  fiue  acres  to  a  fifty  pounde  alotmente  and  so  propor- 
sonable  acording  to  mens  alotments  granted  by  the  comity  for  the  plas  that  is  to 
say  to  thos  that  hould  the  poseson  of  the  medow  alotments  by  their  own  righte  : 
ecth  man  to  tacke  itt  up  by  suckseson  after  the  lots  are  drawn  the  first  too  men 
to  haue  two  days  hberty  to  tack  his  land :  and  bringe  in  his  report  to  ensign  Judd 
who  is  to  lay  it  out  two  them  :  and  so  to  haue  on  day  to  two  men. 

Besides  the  method  by  division,  the  lands  were  disposed  of 
by  grant.  I  have  already  referred  to  the  home  lots,  the  three 
acre  lots  and  the  eight  acre  lots,  bestowed  by  the  committee  in 
the  beginning.  These  grants  were  continued  for  the  purpose  of 
securing  some  common  good,  (as  in  the  case  of  the  grants  to 
the  mill  and  for  the  use  of  the  ministry ;)  or  with  the  design 
of  correcting  inequalities  and  furthering  the  ends  of  impartial 
justice. 

One  would  suppose  that  our  fathers  need  not  have  com- 
l)lained  for  want  of  land,  considering  their  possessions.  Some 
of  them,  however,  considered  themselves  "straitened"  as  in- 
dividuals, and  applied  to  the  committee  for  relief.  Relief  was 
vouchsafed,  as,  for  instance  : 

And  wharas  steuen  upson  macks  complaint  that  he  is  much  straitened  in  his 
presant  posesion  of  lands  we  grant  ane  adition  acording  to  what  the  town  se  cans 
[&c]  to  be  layd  out  by  Tho  Judd  John  Stanly  and  the  present  townsmen*  febey 
6  1080 

And  wharas  Daniell  Porter  [and]  Thomas  richason  mack  complaint  that  they  are 
in  want  of  Land  to  improue  we  grant  liberty  to  the  towne  to  add  to  what  they 
haue  acording  to  their  good  discrestion  and  what  shall  be  alowed  by  the  towne 
shall  be  lay^  out  [to]  them  by  Benjamin  Judd  and  John  stanly  and  also  to  lay  out 
what  belongs  to  the  mille  and  miler  febey  5  1G80 

Joh  Stanley,  it  seems,  was  unfortunate  in  his  allotments, 
and  prayed  for  more  land  in  the  way  of  com]3ensation.  The 
committee  consented  and  advised  the  grant. 


4:2  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUKY. 

Upon  the  petion  [petition  of]  sergent  Jo  stanly  that  he  may  be  acomadated 
with  four  or  fiue  acrs  of  medow  land  up  the  river  allthoug  itt  be  four  or  fiue  miles 
oif  from  the  towne  in  considaration  of  the  meannes  of  his  Alotments  we  the 
comity  doe  aduis  the  inhabitants  to  a  complyance  tharunto:  The  forgoinge  con- 
clution  signed  feb  7th  16S2 

John  Talcott 
John  wadsworth 
Nicho  Olmsted 

After  the  committee  had  withdrawn  from  an  active  parti- 
cipation in  the  aflairs  of  the  plantation,  the  proprietors  con- 
tinued to  make  special  grants  of  land  whenever  occasion  call- 
ed for  them.  At  first,  these  grants  were  somewhat  sparingly 
made,  but  they  gradually  became  common,  till  at  length  the 
lands  were  given  away  with  a  profuse  liberality.  Often  the 
object  was  to  encourage  some  undertaking,  or  business,  or 
trade,  calculated  to  be  beneficial  to  the  people ;  such  as  the 
erection  of  a  saw  mill,  or  fulling  mill,  or  tan  yard.  "When 
there  was  no  purj)ose  but  to  distribute  the  land  as  fast  as  it 
could  be  improved,  among  those  to  whom  it  belonged,  there 
was  an  endeavor  to  preserve  a  sort  of  equality — to  regard  the 
different  and  just  claims  of  the  recipiants.  Land,  however, 
was  abundant  and  not  sufficiently  valuable  or  in  demand,  to 
make  generosity  a  difficult  virtue.  A  main  design  was  to  en- 
courage the  settlement  of  the  town,  and  extend  the  borders  of 
agriculture.  A  wilderness  was  to  be  subdued,  and  workers 
were  wanted.  If  a  man  proposed  to  take  up  a  tract  of  land 
and  cultivate  it,  he  was  considered  as  offering  a  fair  equivalent 
for  it.  All  were  benefited  by  his  labor.  If  a  person  follow- 
ed some  trade,  considered  as  of  first  importance  in  the  new 
plantation,  as  that  of  a  blacksmith  or  clothier,  he  was  regard- 
ed with  special  favor,  and  a  grant  to  him  was  allowed  to  be  a 
good  investment.  If  an  individual,  not  an  inhabitant,  who 
would  make  a  good  citizen,  could  be  induced  by  a  few  acres 
for  jDasture,  or  a  tract  of  boggy  meadow,  to  settle  in  the  town, 
the  proprietors  thought  they  made  a  profitable  bargain. 

Jan.  21st,  1689-90,  there  were  grants  of  land  to  many  of 
the  proprietors,  seven  acres  to  each,  the  lots  to  be  improved 
as   "hogfields"  or  hog  enclosures.     Into  these  the  swine  ap- 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUEY.  43 

pear  to  have  been  turned,  in  the  snmmer  season,  to  root  the 
ground,  to  pick  up  the  nuts  and  thus  obtain  their  living.  Tliese 
"  iiekls  "  seem  to  have  been  east  of  the  town,  on  and  near  Farm- 
ington  road,  in  the  neighborliood  of  the  long  wigwam.  Hog 
Pound,  or  Beaver  Pond  Brook,  and  Turkey  Hill.  I  quote 
a  passage  from  the  record : 

At  the  same  meeting  the  proprietors  granted  to  samuell  hiekox  s''  seauen  a  cers 
of  hind  on  the  hill  on  the  west  side  of  hoog  pound  broke  on  the  same  condition 
riehard  porter  had  his  jan  21   1689 

One  would  naturally  suppose  that  this  use  of  land  for 
keei^ing  swine  was  the  origin  of  the  name  Hog  Pound,  by 
which  the  district  was  known  till  a  very  recent  period.  But 
it  will  be  observed  that  some  of  the  tracts  are  located  on  Hog 
Pound  Brook,  showing  that  the  name  was  in  existence  at  an 
earlier  period.  Most  likely,  however,  the  lands  had  been  em- 
ployed, in  some  instances,  for  a  similar  purpose,  previous  to  the 
date  of  the  grants  named.  Tlie  district  is  now  known  by  the 
more  decorous  name  of  East  Farms. 

At  first  it  was  not  usual  for  the  proprietors  to  attach  any 
conditions  to  the  grants  of  land,  except  they  were  "  not  to  pre- 
judice  highways  and  former  grants."  At  length,  however,  in- 
dividuals who  had  resided  long  enough  in  the  town  to  se- 
cure their  estates,  began  to  show  a  disposition  to  leave.  Jo- 
seph Ilickox  removed  in  1685,  Tliomes  Ilancox  in  1687,  and 
many  others  soon  after.  The  course  was  then,  to  a  considerable 
extent,  changed.  Those  who  were  not  proprietors,  but  the  sons 
of  those  who  were,  no  longer  received  unconditional  grants. 
Sometimes  they  were  to  build  a  portion  of  the  common  fence 
as  a  consideration.  Usually  they  were  required  to  reside  in 
town,  not  off  and  on,  but  "in  a  steady  way,"  four  years,  often 
five,  and  occasionally  even  six  years.  Sometimes,  particu- 
larly if  they  received  house-lots,  they  were  "  to  build  a  tenant- 
able  house  according  to  articles." 

Sometimes  the  proprietors  themselves  were  subjected  to 
conditions.  For  instance,  Jan.  3d,  1686-7.  Abraham  An- 
druss,  Sen.,  had  five  acres  of  land  given  him  on  Little  Brook, 
which  were  to  be  forfeited  if  he  went  away  in  four  years. 


44  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBURT. 

Isaac  Bronson  and  John  Welton  bad  grants  in  1694-5,  whicli 
were  to  hold  good  only  on  condition  they  remained  in  the 
town  fonr  years.  Similar  restrictions  were  imposed  in  other 
cases.  There  was  a  distrust  even  of  the  fathers  of  the  settle- 
ment. Many  were  gone  away,  and  others  were  preparing  to 
follow.  These,  taken  in  connection  with  other  things  to  be 
noticed  hereafter,  occasioned,  very  naturally,  the  greatest  dis- 
couragement. 

The  frequent  refusal  of  those  who  had  signed  the  articles  to 
comply  with  the  conditions  which  they  prescribed,  and  the 
laggard  movements  and  long  delays  of  those  who  intended 
ultimate  compliance,  were  the  cause  of  much  dissatisfaction 
and  early  complaint  on  the  part  of  the  planters,  and  of  strin- 
gent action  by  the  committee.     I  quote  : — 

Att  a  metting  of  the  comite  for  mattatuck:  on  the  26  of  nouembcr  1679: 
whereas  we  haue  receiued  information  by  some  of  the  inhabitants  belonging  to 
that  place  that  [some]  of  the  propriators  to  whom  alotments  ware  granted  haue 
hitherto  neglected  the  settlement  of  them  selues  and  families  there  to  the  great 
discouragment  and  weakening  of  the  hands  of  those:  that  are  Alredy  upon  the 
place  with  their  famelys 

We  haue  thought  meet  to  determine  and  resolue  that  all  such  propriators  as 
shall  not  be  personally  with  their  famelies  inhabiting  att  mattatuck  by  the  last  of 
may  next:  enseuing  and  ther  to  abide  shall  forfitt  all  their  title  property  and 
interest  in  any  alotments  granted  to  them  att  mattatuck  to  be  disposed  by  the 
comity  to  such  other  as  they  shall  aproue  off 

Also  we  doe  further  determine  that  all  such  inhabitants  as  shall  not  erect  a  ■ 
mantion  hous  by  the  last  of  may  come  twelue  month  Acording  to  a  former  article 
to  that  purpose  shall  forfit  all  their  right  and  title  in  lands  att  mattatucke  aforsaid. 

Soon  after,  an  order  was  passed  designed  to  secure  prompt 
action  and  faithfulness  to  engagements  on  the  part  of  new 
subscribers. 

Further  itt  is  agred  by  vs  that  in  case  any  doe  apere  desiring  alotments  ther 
[they]  shall  subscribe  to  original  articles  and  ingag  allso  to  erect  a  dwelling 
hous  acording  to  dementions  [required  by]  said  articles  within  one  year  after  sub- 
scription and  settle  with  his  or  their  famelies  vpon  the  place  within  that  time  oth. 
erwis  to  forfit  all  their  grant  of  land  and  right  therin:  to  be  disposed  to  such 
others  as  the  comity  shall  Judg  meet  feb  5  1680 

Still  there  were  hesitation  and  procrastination  on  the  part  of 
many  proprietors.     Some  neglected  to  build,  others  to  reside 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURT.  45 

in  the  place,  and  others  to  bring  their  families.  Tlie  com- 
plaints became  londer  and  more  frequent.  The  committee, 
for  a  long  time  reluctant  to  act,  were  finally  obliged  to  take 
decisive  measures.  They  passed  the  act  known  as  the  "  Act 
of  Feb.  6th,  1682."  It  declared  the  allotments  of  several  de- 
linquent proprietors,  Benjamin  Judd,  Samuel  Judd  and 
Thomas  Hancox,  "  to  be  condemned  as  forfeited,"  uncondi- 
tionally. The  same  sentence  was  passed  upon  the  allotments 
of  Timothy  Stanley,  Joseph  Gaylord,  John  Carrington,  Abra- 
liamAndruss,  cooper,  Thomas  Newell,  Daniel  Porter,  Thomas 
Warner,  Thomas  Richason,  Obadiah  Richards  and  John 
Scovill;  but  upon  condition  of  "their  submition  and  ref- 
ormation with  their  cohabitation  upon  the  place  one  complete 
yere  as  a  dision  all  [additional]  to  the  four  yers  Injoined  "  by 
the  articles,  their  rights  were  to  be  restored.  It  also  required 
new  subscribers  to  reside  in  the  place  "  the  full  term  of  four 
yers  in  a  stedy  way  and  manor  with  their  famelies,"  and 
all  persons  accepted  as  proprietors,  after  its  date,  were  to  sign 
the  act.  Thomas  Hancox  signed  it  as  a  new  subscriber.  A 
few  others,  afterwards  admitted,  did  the  same. 


We  wliose  [names]  are  under  writen  doc  siibscribe  to  a  faithful!  submition  and 
obseruation  of  the  act  of  the  comity  one  the  other  side  of  this  leafe  fcbuary  6 
1G82: 

subscribed  this  4  of  June  83        Thomas  hancox 

genuary  10:  83  Thomas  Judd  Jun» 

May  26    S-t  Robert  porter 

June  13    BY  philip  Judd 

Timothy  Stanley  and  the  nine  others  whose  names  are  men- 
tioned in  the  same  connection,  "  submitted  and  reformed," 
and  thus  regained  possession  of  their  land. 

The  act  of  removal  to  a  new  settlement  in  the  time  of  which 
I  am  writing  was  a  solemn  thing.  It  was  undertaken  only 
after  certain  formalities  and  much  prayer.  The  Bible  was 
consulted,  and  the  aid  of  the  church  sought.  There  was 
much  and  earnest  endeavor  to  ascertain  the  indications  of 
Providence.  Then,  as  now,  however,  it  was  generally  found, 
at  last,  that  the  finger  of  Providence  pointed  in  the  same  di- 


46  HISTORY   OF   WATERBUKT. 

rection  as  the  inclinations  of  those  who  sought  guidance.  By 
this  remark,  however,  I  do  not  mean  to  impugn  the  motives 
or  question  the  sincerity  of  our  forefathers,  or  the  good  men 
of  our  day. 

The  extract  given  below,  is  from  the  Farmington  church 
record.  It  is  an  answer  to  an  application  for  advice.  The 
paper  is  very  shrewdly  written,  and  contains  much  wordly 
wisdom,  to  say  nothing  of  its  strong  religious  sentiment. 
We  can  see  why  the  church  was  so  reluctant  to  part  with 
William  Judd,  though  the  very  man  the  new  settlement  stood 
in  need  of.  The  record  bears  no  date,  but  there  are  indica- 
tions that  the  time  was  as  early  as  the  spring  of  1677-8. 

The  Church  having  considered  the  desires  of  their  brethren  William,  Thomas, 
John  and  Benjamin  Judd,  as  also  John  Standly,  Jun.  touching  their  removal  from 
us  to  Mattatuck,  agreed  as  foUoweth  : 

1  In  general,  that  considering  the  diverse  difficulty  and  inconueniency  which 
attend  the  plan  toward  which  they  are  looking,  and  how  hazardable  it  may  be, 
for  ought  that  appeareth,  that  the  house  and  ordinances  of  Christ  may  not,  for  a 
long  time  at  least,  be  settled  among  them — 

The  Church  doth  advise  the  brethren,  to  be  wary  of  engaging  far  until  some 
comfortable  hopes  appears  of  being  suited  for  the  inward  man,  in  the  great  things 
fore  mentioned. 

2.  Particularly  to  our  brother  William  Judd,  that  it  having  pleased  God  to 
deal  so  bountifully  with  him — that  not  many  of  the  brethren  with  us  have  so  large 
accommodations  as  himself,  they  see  not  his  call  to  remove,  on  the  account  of 
Btraitness  for  outward  subsistance,  &  therefore  counsel  him,  if  it  may  be  with  sat- 
isfaction to  his  spirit,  to  continue  his  abode  with  us,  hoping  God  [will]  bless  him 
in  so  doing. 

3.  To  the  rest,  though  we  know  [not  how]  much  they  will  be  bettered  as  to 
land,  all  things  considered,  by  there  removal,  especially  .John  and  Benjamin  Judd, 
and  therefore  cannot  much  encourage,  yet  if  the  bent  of  their  Spirits  be  strong  for 
going,  and  the  advice  fore  given,  touching  the  worship  of  God  be  taken,  we  shall 
not  trouble,  but  say  the  will  of  the  Lord  be  done. 

Of  the  above  mentioned  persons,  only  two,  Thomas  Judd 
and  John  Stanley,  Jr.,  lived  up  to  the  articles  and  became 
proprietors  ;  though  the  others,  particularly  William  and  Ben- 
jamin Judd,  found  "the  bent  of  their  spirits  to  be  strong  for 
going,"  and  apparently  tried  hard  to  like  the  enterprise,  but 
finally  gave  it  up,  finding  perhaps  that  they  had  misread  the 
teachings  of  duty. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  47 


CHAPTER    Y. 


THE  COMMON  FENCE  AND  COMMON  FIELD. 

OxE  of  the  first  things  to  be  attended  to  in  the  new  settle- 
ment, was  the  building  of  fences  for  the  protection  of  the 
crops  and  the  meadow  lands.  The  committee  gave  this  sub- 
ject their  early  attention.  I  quote  from  their  acts  under  date 
Jan.  15,1677,(1677-8):— 

We  order  the  comon  fenc  one  the  este  sid  the  riuer  for  securing  the  medows 
shall  be  made  sufitiently  by  the  last  of  may  acording  to  the  number  of  acrs  of 
raedow  land  ecth  propriator  is  seized  of  and  we  desire  and  apoint  willum  Judd, 
Thomas  Judd  and  John  Stanly  to  proportion  the  said  fenc  and  lay  out  ecth  person 
his  just  dues  and  being  soe  layed  out:  ecth  person  that  shall  neglect  macking  his 
just  proportion  shall  be  finable  acording  to  the  law  of  this  colony. 

There  was  another  order  made  regarding  the  "  common 
fence,"  bearing  date  March  11th,  1678-9.  By  this,  a  new  and 
additional  division,  it  would  seem,  was  to  be  erected,  and  the 
proprietors  were  required  to  make  their  respective  proportions 
by  the  first  of  May,  then  ensuing. 


Wharas  there  is  a  mile  of  fence  tharabouts  yet  to  be  erected:  for  securing  thos 
lands  that  are  under  improuement  from  spoill  of  catle  and  swine  wee  doe  aduise 
and  order  that  willum  Judd  Thomas  Judd  and  John  Stanly  Jun  shall  proportion 
and  stacke  out  to  ecth  propriator  his  proportion  with  all  sped  conueni[ent] 

We  further  order  that  ecth  propriator  doe  erect  a  sufisent  fence  vpon  thoss  re- 
spective places  apointed  [to  him]  for  defenc  of  that  land  that  no  damage  to  either 
corne  or  gras  by  cattle  or  swine  [be  done]  which  fence  shall  be  done  betwixt  this 
and  the  first  of  May  next: 

Late  in  the  spring  of  the  next  year,  orMay22d,  1680,  there 
was  an  order  issued,  signed  by  John  Talcott  and  John  Wads- 
wortli,  for  the  building  of  three  hundred  and  fifty  rods  of  ad- 
ditional fence  "  forthwith  ;"  and  each  proprietor  who  neglect- 
ed his  work  till  the  first  of  June  was  to  pay  sixpence  per 
rod,  and  for  longer  delay,  sixpence  per  week.  Further  action 
upon  the  same  subject  was  taken  the  succeeding  year.     Un- 


48  HISTOKT    OF    WATERBURY. 

der  date  of  Feb.  8,  1680,  (1680-1,)  tlie  committee  directed  a 
portion  of  fence  to  be  constructed  by  the  first  of  April. 

The  meadow  lands  np  and  down  the  river,  on  which  the  early 
settlers  mainly  depended  for  tillage  and  fodder,  were  regard- 
ed as  particularly  valuable.  They  were  distributed  in  the  be- 
ginning, but  the  lots  lay  in  common  ;  that  is,  they  were  not 
separated  by  division  fences.  Fences  were  expensive  and 
could  not  be  afforded ;  besides,  on  the  low  grounds  they  were 
liable  to  be  swept  away  by  the  frequent  floods.  For  the  pro- 
tection of  the  meadows  (as  may  be  gathered  from  the  preced- 
ing extracts  and  remarks)  a  "common  fence"  was  erect- 
ed running  along  on  the  high  ground,  east  of  the  river  and 
west  of  the  village,  and  extending  a  distance  north  and  south. 
It  was  called  "  common,"  because  it  was  for  the  equal  benefit 
of  all  and  was  built  and  maintained  by  all.  At  this  period, 
as  no  inhabitants  dwelt  upon  the  west  side  of  the  river,  and  no 
cattle  were  kept  there,  this  single  line  of  fence  was  deemed 
sufficient  for  the  protection  of  the  meadows.  It  was  erected, 
in  the  first  instance,  and  supported  afterwards,  by  the  propri- 
etors in  proportion  to  the  land  each  had  to  be  inclosed — a 
given  number  of  rods  and  feet  to  each  acre.  A  man's  partic- 
ular portion  of  fence  was  determined  by  lot.  Beginning  at 
the  Mill  River  (Mad  River)  and  running  north,  each  man's 
position  in  the  line  was  decided  by  the  number  drawn,  num- 
ber one  standing  first,  number  two  second,  and  so  on.  This 
being  done,  each  person's  portion  of  the  work  was  measured 
and  "  staked  out." 

In  the  first  Proprietors'  Book,  so  called,  in  the  beginning  of 
the  volume,  is  the  following  entry  : 

The  first  diuision  [of  fence]  begins  at  the  made  riuer  and  soe  runs  northwards: 
till  itt  butts  on  the  banke  of  the  riuer:  against  stells  [Steels']  meadow  as  itt  falls 
by  lott:— 

Then  follow  the  names  of  the  proprietors,  beginning  with 
Thomas  Richason,  in  the  order  apparently  in  which  the  num- 
bers were  drawn,  with  the  length  of  fence,  in  "  rods,"  "  fete  " 
and  "  inches,"  assigned  to  each,  the  amount  of  fence  being,  in 
every  instance,   proportioned   to   proprietorship.     There   are 


^l^Z^^^^'^  ^.-v?^^ 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  4:9 

twenty-six  names  in  this  list,  including  three  "grate  lotes,"  the 
latter  having  thirty-three  rods  and  fifteen  feet  each — the 
proportion  for  £150  propriety.  The  entire  length  of  this  divis- 
ion of  fence  appears  to  have  been  two  hundred  and  eighty- 
four  rods,  nine  feet  and  ten  inches,  or  seven-eighths  of  a  mile. 
It  was  doubtless  that  portion  which  was  first  built,  (in  the 
spring  of  1677-8,)  it  being  more  immediately  necessary  than 
other  portions. 

This  catalogue  of  names,  on  the  record,  is  followed  by  a 
second  division  of  fence,  beginning  at  the  north  end  of  the 
last  division  and  running  northward.  Then  come  thirty 
names,  including  the  three  great  lots,  and  a  line  of  fence 
amounting  to  two  hundred  and  fifty-eight  rods,  one  foot  and 
three  inches,  or  over  three  quarters  of  a  mile.  It  was  probably 
erected  in  the  spring  of  167S-9.  The  third  division  began 
at  the  Mill  River  and  ran  south  three  hundred  and  four  rods, 
twelve  feet  and  nine  inches,  or  nearly  one  mile,  and  was  par- 
celed out  to  twenty-seven  proprietors,  inclusive  of  the  great 
lots,  and  seems  to  have  been  built  in  the  spring  of  1679-80. 
The  fourth  division  continued  the  line  south  two  hundred  and 
seven  rods,  twelve  feet,  seven  inches,  or  over  three-eighths 
of  a  mile,  and  was  distributed  among  thirty-seven  proprietors, 
counting  tlie  great  lots.  It  appears  to  have  been  made  in  the 
spring  of  1680-81. 

The  four  divisions  of  common  fence  spoken  of,  (erected  in 
the  early  parts  of  the  four  first  years  after  the  settlement,)  two 
north  and  two  south  of  the  Mad  River,  in  their  whole  length, 
measured  a  little  over  three  and  a  quarter  miles,  the  two 
northern  divisions  making  somewhat  more  than  half  of  the 
whole.  A  fifth  division  is  spoken  of  in  1686-7.  At  any  rate, 
additions  were  made  to  the  fence  from  time  to  time,  either  way, 
as  circumstances  required.  At  an  early  period  (before  1700) 
it  seems  to  have  reached  Long  Meadow  Falls,  about  two  and 
a  half  miles  below  the  village,  on  the  south  ;  and  on  the  north, 
to  have  extended  as  far  as  Mount  Taylor,  four  miles  from  the 
center.  Before  16S5-6,  it  had  crossed  llancox  Brook,  as  appears 
from  the  record  which  follows: 

4 


50  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUEY. 

Mattatock  march  y®  last  16S5-6  y«  town  by  uoat  detrmined  y*  tho3  men  yt 
haue  fenc  ouer  hancox  brook  and  northward  from  y«  town  be  brought  ouer  to  y« 
east  s<*  y«  brook  and  set  in  y«  rang  on  as  good  ground  as  they  now  stand  for 
fencing  y'  is  on  y«  rang  y'  is  determined  furder  to  fenc  for  y«  securing  of  y« 
meadows. 

This  removal  offence  seems  to  have  been  in  pursuance  of  a 
plan  for  protecting  the  lands  farther  np  the  brook,  and  so 
crossing  perhaps  at  a  higher  point.  The  lands  to  be  thus  se- 
cured were  about  to  be  divided  among  the  proprietors,  and 
brought  under  cultivation.  It  seemed  to  be  the  design  to  in- 
clude within  the  common  fence  all  the  lands  which  were  most 
valuable  for  meadow  and  tillage.  A  lot  at  "Pine  Hole,"  so 
late  as  1733,  is  described  in  a  deed  as  within  the  "common 
field,"  and  as  bounded  east  on  the  common  fence. 

Near  the  village  the  common  fence  ran  as  follows  :  Be- 
ginning at  Mill  Kiver  a  little  above  the  manufiictorj  of 
the  Hotchkiss  and  Merriman  Manufacturing  Company,  at 
a  point  (where  "it  was  agreed,"  March  31st,  1709,  "  by  a 
mager  uott  to  cat  the  fens  cros  the  mad  riuer  in  the  comon 
line  seauen  rod")  at  the  southeast  corner  of  Abraham  Andruss, 
Sen's  house  lot  of  three  and  a  half  acres,  it  ran  northwesterly 
along  the  brow  of  the  hill  between  said  Andruss'  land  and  the 
Mill  Plain  fifteen  acre  lot,  (sometimes  called  Hopkins'  Plain,) 
till  it  reached  Union  street,  at  "  Union  square."  Thence  it 
continued  along  the  south  side  of  Union  street  and  the  north 
side  of  the  Plain  above  mentioned  to  the  hill  just  west  of  Elm 
street,  where  there  were  bars  and  an  entrance  to  the  common 
field.  Thence  I  can  find  no  early  traces  of  it  till  we  come  to 
the  south  meadow  gate  at  the  southwest  corner  of  Bank  and 
Grand  streets.  Probably,  at  the  bars  in  Union  street,  it  con- 
tinued westerly,  in  the  line  of  that  street,  to  the  point  named 
in  Bank  street,  thus  including  within  the  common  field  the 
house  lots  of  Stephen  Upson,  Samuel  Scott  and  Richard 
Porter.     Here  it  ran,  at  so  late  a  period  as  1790.* 


*  This  appears  from  a  deed,  dated  Feb.  10th,  of  that  year,  from  Thomas  Porter  to  his  son 
Phineas  Porter,  convej'ing,  for  £78  ISs.  lawful  money,  a  tract  of  land  in  the  "  common  i3eld," 
e.stimated  at  seventeen  acres,  lying  between  Union  street  and  the  old  roads  running,  one  south- 
westerly from  the  Plain  bars,  the  other  southeasterly  from  Bank  street.  The  boundary  line  is 
described  in  the  i.  eed  as    follows  :   "  Beginning   about  two  rods  east  of  David  Pritchard's 


IIISTOKY    OF    WATERBUEY.  51 

From  tlie  corner  of  Bank  street,  the  fence  extended  west  in 
the  south  line  of  Grand  street  and  in  front  of  Stephen  Upson's 
and  John  Welton's  land  and  the  burying  yard  to  the  Little 
Pasture  (parsonage  lot)  and  Willow  street.  Thence  it  passed 
up  Willow  street,  on  the  westerly  side,  (leaving  Benjamin 
Jones'  and  Dea.  Judd's  houses  on  the  left)  to  West  Main  street 
and  the  "common  gate."  Thence  it  continued  past  John 
Scovill's  in  the  west  line  of  Willow  street,  up  the  hill  and 
into  the  woods  above.  Afterwards,  it  appears  to  have  borne 
off"  more  to  the  west  till  it  reached  the  river's  bank,  opposite 
Steel's  meadow,  seven-eighths  of  a  mile  from  the  starting  place 
at  Mad  River.  A  little  farther  on,  it  left  the  Naugatuck  and 
extended  in  a  more  easterly  direction,  so  as  to  include  the 
better  lands  east  and  south  of  Hancock's  Brook. 

In  the  above  description,  I  have  considered  the  home  lots 
of  Benjamin  Jones,  Dea.  Judd  and  John  Scovill  as  lying 
within  the  common  field.  This  was  undoubtedly  the  fact, 
although  I  do  not  find  the  circumstance  alluded  to  in  any  con- 
veyance, or  by  any  direct  or  incidental  remark. 

The  fence  spoken  of  above  was  removed  from  time  to  time, 
farther  westward,  till  it  came  to  inclose  the  meadows,  proper- 
ly so  called,  only.  A  portion  of  it,  in  the  form  of  an  old, 
broken  stone-wall,  may  still  be  seen,  standing  where  it  was 
placed,  after  this  process  of  removal  was  begun,  up  Willow 
street,  north  of  the  village,  a  little  west  of  the  road. 

East  of  the  Mad  Biver  the  common  fence  ran  south  and 
southwesterly,  keeping  on  the  west  side  of  the  mill  lot  of  eight 
acres,  and  below  occupying  the  high  ground  at  some  distance 
from  the  river. 

Soon  after  1700,  when  people  began  to  settle  on  the  west 
side  of  the  river,  more  frequent  complaints  were  made  of  dam- 
age done  to  the  common  fields  by  cattle.  In  ITOl,  the  town 
resolved  that  all  horses,  cattle  or  swine  found  running  at  large 


dwelling  house,  [on  the  southwest  corner  of  Bank  and  Grand,]  extending  eastward  to  the 
highway  that  goeth  into  the  common  field  at  the  mill  plain  bars,  then  southward  by  the  high- 
way till  it  comes  to  the  highway  that  goeth  to  Salem,  then  by  said  highway  to  the  firat  corner, 
butting  all  sides  on  highway."  At  the  date  of  this  deed,  and  afterwards,  the  land  on  the  borders 
of  the  Great  Brook,  lying  within  this  tract,  and  for  a  considerable  distance  above,  was  an 
alder  swamp. 


52  HISTOKY    OF   WATERBURY. 

west  of  the  river  might  be  impounded.     The  following  vote 
has  relation  to  this  subject : — 

April  6,  1702,  y«  propriators  by  uoate  agree  that  who  soeuer  shall  haue  liberty 
to  Hue  on  y^  west  s"!  y*  fence  or  great  riuer  within  our  bounds  shall  submit  to  y* 
order  of  y«  propriators  as  if  they  liued  y^  east  s*"  y«  common  fenc  as  to  our 
agreement  of  fencing  or  [our]  meadows  y*  by  reson  of  them  we  be  not  under 
nesesity  of  fencing  on  y«  west  s^  our  meadows  but  y'  theyr  creators  be  pound 
fesent  in  any  of  our  meadows,  and  they  oblidged  to  keep  theyr  creators  out  of 
our  feild,  as  if  they  were  fenced  round  and  he  y'  gos  to  Hue  on  y"  west  sid  to 
subscrib  this  act  in  testimony  of  his  submiting  to  it  and  he  y'  refuses  to  submit 
to  this  order  not  to  be  alowed  to  Hue  on  y^  west  s^ 

It  became  more  apparent,  however,  from  year  to  year,  that 
it  would  be  necessary  to  construct  a  fence  on  the  west  side  of 
the  river,  running  down  to  and  crossing  it  at  each  end,  so  as 
completely  to  encircle  the  common  field.  Some,  however,  so 
late  as  1704,  were  in  favor  of  extending  the  line  on  the  east 
side  south  as  far  as  Beacon  Hill  Brook,  the  southern  boundary 
of  the  town,  and  of  being  content,  for  the  present,  with  the 
additional  security  which  that  extension  would  afford.  I  copy 
the  vote  of  the  proprietors  to  show  how  this  subject  was  dis- 
posed of : — 

[Voted]  to  fenc  from  y*  east  end  of  y*  mountain  against  mount  taylor  on  y« 
west  s"*  y®  Riuer  and  so  to  y«  falls  in  y«  Riuer  at  y«  lor  end  of  y*  long  meadow 
and  to  make  y«  fenc  good  and  substanchall  aganst  al  orderly  horses  and  cattell 
and  sufficiant  aganst  too  yeir  olds  and  y«  fenc  to  be  uewed  by  the  fenc-uewers. 
deak  Tho  judd  Left  Timothy  Stanly  Jo"  Hopkins  sen''  benjamin  borns  sen'  &Tho. 
judd  ju'  was  Chosen  a  com~ty  to  modeU  y«  land*  in  s<*  feild  and  proportion  y« 
fenc  of  s^  feild  to  each  man  acording  to  his  propriaty  &  lay  out  to  each  man  his 
part —  y«  lands  on  which  y«  fenc  is  to  be  laid  is  all  y'  is  fit  for  plowing  or  mo- 
ing  in  s^  feild  hauing  Respect  to  y«  fenc  already  layd  out  each  man  to  keep  his 
fenc  alredy  layd  out  to  him  and  there  being  much  land  spoyled  with  y«  flood 
y«  oners  of  such  land  to  be  considred  and  abated  in  this  diuition  y'  y«  whol 
Rang  of  fenc  of  s"*  feild  may  be  equally  proportioned  to  each  propriator  accord- 
ing to  his  benifit  of  lands  in  s^  feild  as  near  as  they  can  desemb""  12  1704 

Y«  propriators  agreed  to  leaue  a  mile  at  y«  north  end  of  y«  loyn  wher  they 
began  to  measure  on  y"  west  sid  where  they  intend  to  set  y«  fenc  to  be  dun  by 
y*  propriators  in  a  genaral  way  to  be  layd  on  y^  land  yet  undeuided  as  it  shall  be 
taken  up  march  y«  S"*  170-| 


*  "To  modell  ye  land  " — to  appraise  the  land,  or  rather  to  determine  its  relative  value  or 
quality,  in  order  that  an  apportionment  of  fence  on  this  basii  might  be  made  among  the  owners. 
I  infer  this  to  be  the  meaning  of  the  phrase,  from  the  connections  in  which  it  is  used  in  the  record. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBUEY.  53 

Tliis  last  part  of  the  fence  was  to  be  done  by  the  propri- 
etors in  their  collective  capacity  until  the  undivided  lands 
spoken  of  were  taken  up,  when  it  was  to  be  distributed  among 
the  owners  of  such  lands  according  to  usage. 

But  the  vote  which  I  have  given,  dated  December  12th,  1704^ 
and  which  determined  the  princij)le  on  which  the  new  fence 
was  to  be  divided  among  the  proprietors,  gave  much  dissatis- 
faction. At  a  subsequent  meeting,  April  10th,  1705,  a  modi- 
fication of  the  principle  was  sought  and  obtained.  It  was 
then  determined — 

Y'  y6  whole  Rang  of  fenc  quit  round  sd  feild  shail  be  equally  diuided  on  y* 
acer  alike  of  all  sorts  of  land  With  in  s'^  feild  booth  of  plowing  nioing  up- 
land and  paustor  y'  is  allready  layd  out  or  giuea  to  any  man  and  each  man  to 
maintain  his  fenc  so  layd  out  to  him  but  the  fenc  already  layd  on  y®  east  s"* 
[side]  to  remain  and  belong  to  them  y*  it  belongs  to  not  to  remoue  them  but  to 
be  counted  as  part  of  their  diuition  as  fare  as  it  will  go  y®  former  act  by  this  made 
uoid  in  exempting  pastor  lands  considering  waste  land  &  modalizing 

This  uoat  was  full  but  four  or  5  acted  aganst  it  and  doctor  porter  one  of  them 
did  protest  aganst  it. 

But  there  was  delay  in  making  the  fence,  and  much  mur- 
muring at  the  injustice  of  the  last  vote.  By  that  vote,  it  will 
be  noticed,  each  man's  proportion  of  fence  was  to  depend,  as 
it  did  in  the  beginning,  by  order  of  the  grand  committee,  on 
the  number  of  acres  he  owned  in  the  common  field,  without 
reference  to  the  value  of  the  land ;  so  that  a  person  having 
twenty  acres  of  valuable  "  moing "  land  had  to  build  no 
more  fence  than  he  who  had  twenty  acres  of  upland  or  "  paus- 
tor," or  who  had  a  large  proportion  of  waste  lands  barely 
worth  fencing.  But  the  argument  was  not  all  on  one  side.  It 
would  cost  as  much  to  fence  the  poor  as  the  good  land.  An 
acre  of  the  second  or  third  quality  increased  the  size  of  the 
field  to  be  inclosed  as  much  as  an  acre  of  the  first  quality.  If 
a  man's  lands  had  been  damaged  by  floods  it  might  be  claim- 
ed that  it  was  his  misfortune  and  not  his  neighbors' ;  unless, 
indeed,  the  neighbors  chose  to  share  it  with  him.  There  was 
then  some  show  of  right  in  a  per  acre  distribution  of  the  fence. 
But  those  who  claimed  this  at  last  yielded  the  point.  Our 
fathers  were  friends  of  peace,  and  bore  each  other's  burdens. 


54  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUKY. 

In  order  "  for  to  attain  a peicable  preceding"  the  proprietors 
again  agreed  "to  model  y®  land,"  " proportioning  y"  fenc  to 
each  propriator  according  to  liis  benifit,"  "  abating  for  paustor 
lands,  waste  lands  and  lands  spoyled  with  the  flood."  In  fact, 
the  vote  that  was  passed  on  the  12th  of  Dec,  1704,  was,  with 
some  slight  alterations  of  orthography,  &c.,  again  adopted. 
This  was  on  the  17th  day  of  Dec.  1706.  A  new  committee — 
Thomas  Jiidd,  Jr.,  John  Hopkins,  Sen.,  and  Dea.  Judd — was 
appointed  "  to  model  y  land  in  sd  feild  &  denid  y^  fenc," 
while  "  Stephen  ubson  sen,  John  welton  sen''  and  abraham  an- 
druss  "  were  chosen  "  a  com~ty  to  model  y^  lands  "  of  the  first 
named  committee. 

But  this  west  fence  was  long  in  getting  itself  bnilt.  The 
truth  is,  it  was  a  great  work  for  the  people,  considered  as  an 
addition  to  their  other  necessary  labor,  in  their  then  weakened 
condition.  But  our  fathers  were  men  of  pluck.  Votes 
were  taken  and  committees  appointed,  the  land  measur- 
ed and  "modeled,"  and  the  work  apportioned  "according 
to  interest  and  benefit ;"  and  at  last  a  sort  of  board  of  relief 
was  selected  "  to  Regulate  mistackes  if  any  be  and  if  any  are 
over  charged  to  haue  it  taken  off  and  they  y*  want  to  haue 
it  [;]  but  if  any  haue  not  enough  fenc  and  it  be  not  in  y®  loyn 
[line]  staked  out  to  takeitby  sucsesioiiat  y^  nortliend,  y^  south 
ward  to  be  first  so  sucsesiuely  [April  12,  1708.]"  The  fence 
upon  the  west  side,  like  that  upon  the  east,  was  designed  to 
inclose  all  the  lands  most  valuable  for  culture  which  could 
be  conveniently  done.  It  ran  along  npon  the  high  ground, 
in  many  places  at  a  distance  from  the  river,  and  the  remains 
of  it  are  still  met  with  at  certain  points,  in  tlie  form  of  a 
broken  wall  of  stone. 

The  whole  quantity  of  divided  lands  included  in  the  com- 
mon field,  soon  after  the  west  side  fence  was  built,  when  the 
entire  common  fence  was  apportioned,  seems  to  have  been  six 
hundred  and  eighty-one  acres.  How  much  land  there  was  un- 
divided, or  which  had  not  yet  been  taken  up,  may  be  gathered 
from  the  circumstance  that  one  mile  offence  at  the  upper  end, 
on  the  west  side,  was  left,  by  the  act  of  March,  1704-5,  "  to  be 
done  in  a  general  way,"  and  to  be  afterwards  distributed  to 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUKY. 


65 


those  who  sliould  come  into  possession  of  the  inclosed  undivi- 
ded lands.  One  mile  of  fence  may  therefore  be  considered  as 
the  just  proportion  of  the  prospective  owners — as  the  propor- 
tion which  the  undivided  bore  to  the  divided  lands.  As  there 
were  twelve  miles  of  fence  in  the  whole,  six  miles  on  each 
side  the  river,  and  as  eleven  miles  represented  six  hundred  and 
eighty-one  acres,  one  mile  should  represent  sixty-two  acres. 
These  sums  added  together,  give  seven  hundred  and  forty-three 
acres  as  the  entire  contents  of  the  common  Held,  at  the  time 
indicated. 

To  show  who  were  the  owners  of  the  divided  lands  in  the 
common  field,  how  they  were  distributed  and  how  the  fence 
was  apportioned,  at  the  period  of  which  I  am  speaking,  I  give 
an  extract : 


An  aecountt  of  the  number  of  the  acurs  of  land  cch  man  has  to  fens  for 
generall  feild  as  it  was  raesured  by  us:  in  march  1709 


Thomas  Judd 

Steun  ubson 

John  scoidl 

Abraham  Andruss 

27 

Jeremiah  Peck 

30 

Wid.  Andruss 

14 

Doct.  Porter 

26 

Benjamin  Barnes 

21 

Richard  Porter 

10 

Serg.  Bronson 

17 

Thomas  Porter 

6 

Isaac  Bronson 

Obadiah  Richards 

10 

John  Bronson 

9 

John  Richards 

18 

Wid.  Bronson 

8 

Thomas  Richason 

13 

Mr.  Bull 

4 

John  Richason 

7 

John  Carrington 

5 

John  Scovill 

21 

Joseph  Gaylord 

4 

Edmund  Scott 

19 

Benjamin  Hickox 

George  Scott 

16 

William  Hickox 

21 

Jonathan  Scott 

1 

Thomas  Hickox 

19 

David  Scott 

11 

Ebenezer  Hickox 

i 

Mr.  Southmayd 

21 

John  Hopkins 

22 

Lt.  Timothy  Stanley 

38 

Wid.  Jones 

11 

Samuel  Stanley 

29 

John  Judd 

25 

School  Land 

1 

Philip  Judd 

15 

Stephen  Upson 

24 

Thomas  Judd  Jr. 

23 

Thomas  Warner 

6 

Dea.  Judd 

47 

Daniel  Warner 

2 

Benjamin  Judd 

John  Warner 

1 

Mill  Land 

19 

John  Welton 

18 

Thomas  Newell 

1 

Stephen  Welton 

11 

Parsonage 

18 

Thomas  Welton 

1 

56  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY. 

The  common  fence  was  variously  constructed  according  to 
the  nature  of  the  ground  and  the  convenience  of  materials. 
It  was  made  of  rails  laid  in  the  form  of  the  "  worm  fence,"  or 
of  logs  and  poles,  with  the  help  of  stakes.  If  stones  were  more 
abundant  than  anything  else,  these  were  laid  into  a  wall.  I 
find  the  hedge  fence  spoken  of,  its  strength  being  increased 
by  stakes.  In  some  instances,  a  ditch  was  dug,  and  its  effect 
augmented  by  rails  or  a  hedge  upon  the  embankment. 

The  following  order  relates  to  the  "  suificiency "  of  the 
common  fence. 

March:  20:  1691:  an  ordor  What  shall  be  counted  soficien  fenc  for  our  meadows 

Rayl  fenc  to  be:  4:  foots  high  not  exseeding:  6:  inches  between  y«  Rayls:  too 
foots  from  y*  ground  upward — heg  fenc:  four  foots  and  a  half  high:  5  stakes  to 
each  Rod  and  well  Rought — ston  fenc,  three  foots  and  nin  inches  in  height — 
log  or  pool  fenc  four  foots  in  height  and  well  Rought — dich,  too  foots  wid  and 
Rayls  or  heg  four  foots  in  height  from  y*  bottom  of  y®  ditch  to  y*  top  of  y*  fenc 
and  well  Rought — 

And  if  there  be  any  aduantag  by  resin  of  the  land  or  plac  where  y«  fenc  is  it 
is  to  be  left  to  y«  judgement  of  y«  fencuewers  what  shall  be  soficant — 

By  order  of  y*  tounsmen  abraham  andrus  John  hopkins — aprill:  y«:  6:  1692: 
this  order  to  stand  for  y®  fenc  uewers  to  go  by  till  y®  town  see  cans  to  alter  it 

Thomas  Judd 

In  the  spring  season,  when  vegetation  began  to  start,  it  be- 
came the  duty  of  each  proprietor  to  put  in  good  repair  his 
portion  of  the  common  fence.  The  proprietors  each  year,  in 
meeting,  fixed  upon  the  day  beyond  which  the  work  should 
not  be  neglected.  The  day  cbosen  was  usually  between  the 
tenth  and  fifteenth  of  March. 

Immediately  after  the  expiration  of  the  time  for  these  re- 
pairs, the  fence  viewers,  who  were  annually  appointed  by  the 
town,  were  required  to  make  a  careful  examination  of  the 
fence,  to  decide  whether  it  was  conformable  to  law,  and  an  ade- 
quate protection  for  the  lands  inclosed.  If  they  found  it  in- 
sufficient in  any  place,  they  gave  notice  to  him  to  whom  it 
belonged,  requiring  him  to  make  it  good  in  five  days,  accord- 
ing to  the  statute.  In  case  this  notice  was  neglected,  it  became 
the  duty  of  the  fence  viewers  to  make  the  necessary  repairs, 
and  to  charge  the  delinquent  double  the  cost  of  the  work,  to 
be  collected  by  warrant.     If  they  were  not  able  to  make  tJie 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY.  57 

repairs,  or  "  hire  sufficient  help  to  do  the  same,  so  that  the 
common  field  may  be  timely  secured,"  they  were  authorized 
by  law 

To  make  complaint  to  the  next  Assistant,  or  Justice  of  the  Peace ;  and  it  shall 
be  in  tlie  power  of  such  Assistant  or  Justice  of  the  peace,  to  issue  out  his  warrant 
to  the  Constable  of  said  Town,  in  which  such  common  field  is  situate,  or  to  the 
fence  viewers,  to  impress  men  and  teams  sufficient  to  repair  such  defective  fence, 
who  shall  be  paid  by  such  fence  viewers  for  their  labor,  as  they  can  agree,  or  as 
shall  be  determined  by  such  Assistant  or  Justice  of  the  Peace.  [Acts  and  Laws, 
printed  1715.] 

Early  in  the  spring,  annually,  there  was  a  vote  passed  by  the 
proprietors  "  to  burn  about  the  common  fence."  I  give  an 
example : 

March  6th  1709-10  The  propriators  agreed  by  uoat  that  the  beating  the 
Drum  through  the  town  ouer  night  shall  be  warning  that  the  fence  on  the  west 
side  is  to  be  burnt  about  the  next  day  and  on  the  east  side  the  day  following. 

In  obedience  to  this  summons,  all  the  owners  of  the  common 
fence  sallied  forth,  each,  I  suppose,  to  look  after  his  own. 
Wherever  the  fence  was  made  of  combustible  material,  they 
set  fire  to  the  dry  leaves,  grass  and  other  rubbish  in  its  imme- 
diate ncighborhod,  preventing,  by  great  watchfulness,  its 
spreading  to  the  woods,  or  destroying  the  fence.  This  being 
done,  the  woods  and  fields  were  burnt  over  without  concern 
for  the  purpose  of  improving  the  pasturage.  In  this  way,  too, 
the  damage  which  might  have  resulted  from  accidental  fires, 
not  infrequent,  was  prevented. 

Sometimes  the  firing  of  the  woods  was  forbidden  for  a 
season,  in  order  that  the  young  trees  might  attain  some  growth. 
For  instance,  December  13th,  1713,  '-it  was  voted  that  the 
east  woods  should  not  be  fired  for  seven  years,"  and  "  if  any 
person  shall  fire  the  above  woods,  he  shall  pay  20s." 

Early  in  the  history'  of  the  town,  there  were  two  gates  on 
the  east  side  the  river,  frequently  referred  to,  opening  a  pas- 
sage through  the  fence  from  the  village  to  the  common  field. 
One  of  these  M-as  in  Bank  street,  near  Grand,  and  was  called 
the  south  gate.  It  was  not  removed  till  recently — some 
twenty  years  ago.     Tlie  other  was  near  the  west  corners  of 


58  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURT. 

Willow  and  West  Main  streets,  and  was  known  by  the  name  of 
the  west  or  common  gate.  This,  it  seems,  was  removed,  at 
the  date  mentioned  below,  to  a  point  farther  west,  some  ten  or 
twelve  rods  probably,  and  the  common  fence  extended  on 
either  side  down  to  it.  The  record,  it  will  be  noticed,  does  not 
convey  a  very  clear  idea. 

Genuary  25.  1*70^  y®  town  ordered  y'  y«  west  gate  and  fenc  belonging  to  y*  towp 
should  be  remoued  belo  deac  judds  barn  to  be  directed  by  y^  towns  men  in  seting 
of  it  down  and  John  scouell  to  set  y'  part  of  his  common  [fence]  y'  frunts  y» 
highway  clos  in  y'  highway  where  y®  gate  is  to  be  set  deac  judd  and  John  scouill 
hauing  consented  to  haue  theyr  fenc  next  s"*  highway  from  y^  common  fenc  doun 
to  s"*  gate  to  be  accounted  common  fenc  and  proceded  in  y'  respect  by  y*  fencuew- 
ers  as  such. 

On  the  west  side  of  the  river  there  were  no  gates,  but  four 
sets  of  bars.  The  "west  bars"  were  on  the  Woodbury  road 
west  of  the  present  covered  bridge.  The  "  south  bars  "  were 
on  the  way  to  Town  Plot  by  the  present  K.  E..  depot,  crossing  the 
river  near  the  new  bridge.  The  "Long  Meadow  bars  "were 
on  the  road  to  Judd's  Meadow,  below  the  "riding  place"  at 
the  lower  end  of  Mad  Meadow.  "Isaac's  Meadow  bars  "  were 
on  the  road  which  ran  up  Manhan  Meadow,  crossing  the  river 
near  the  present  fording  place,  and  so  on  west  through 
Steel's  Meadow  and  over  Steel's  Brook  towards  Elon  Clark's. 

For  many  years  after  the  settlement  of  the  town,  there  were 
no  private  fences  except  those  which  inclosed  the  home  lots. 
Individuals  relied  on  the  common  fence  to  protect  their  crops. 
Lands  lying  without  this  fence  were  for  a  time  undivided. 
They  were  used  by  all  for  wood,  timber,  stone,  pasturage,  &c., 
and  were  called  the  "  commons."  The  cattle,  in  the  pasturing 
season,  were  kept  in  herds  which  were  watched  by  a  herdsman. 
I  find  an  "  order"  of  the  committee  relating  to  this  subject : 

Wharas  we  receiued  a  paper  signed  by  sarg'  Thomas  Judd  Isaac  bronson 
and  benjamin  Judd  in  refaranc  to  herding  of  cattell  we  doe  order  and  apoint  for 
the  futur  that  the  inhabitants  att  a  towne  meeting  the  maigor  of  the  inhabitants 
so  meete  shall  haue  full  pouer  to  resolue  and  determin  the  way  and  method  for 
herding  and  to  statt  what  shall  be  charged  for  keeping  of  cows  and  what  shall  be 
leuied  one  dry  cattle 

april  5  1682. 

The  sheep  of  the  town  were  put  under  the  care  of  a  shep- 


HISTORY    OF    WATEKBUEY.  69 

herd,  and  thus  kept  from  miscliief.     I  discover,  liowever,  no 
action  on  this  subject  earlier  than  ITOS. 

Att  sheep  meeting  in  waterbuey  marcli=29=:17t  8  deac  Judd  John  scouell  and 
John  Richason  was  chosen  sheep  mastors  for  this  yir  to  order  y^  prudensials  of 
y®  sheep  and  to  hire  a  sheepord  and  see  him  pay"*  as  y*  law  directs  by  y^  owners  of 
y«  sheep 

The  meadows  and  the  lands  near  the  river  were  convenient, 
required  little  clearing  or  expensive  preparation,  and  were 
easily  worked.  On  these  and  their  home  lots,  the  people  re- 
lied for  their  crops.  In  consequence  of  the  value  of  the  lands 
Mdiich  it  embraced,  the  common  field  was  an  important  in- 
terest. The  proprietors  gave  much  of  their  time  to  its  concerns. 
They  framed  such  regulations  as  were  for  the  good  of  all.  A 
major  vote  governed  ;  not  a  major  vote  of  the  proprietors, 
but  of  pounds  of  propriety.  The  Colonial  Assembly  granted 
general  powers,  and  prescribed  the  mode  of  exercising  them. 

After  the  fence  had  been  "  done  up  "  in  the  spring,  and  the 
fence  viewers  had  attended  to  their  duty,  seeing  that  every 
thing  was  fast,  the  haywards  were  sent  out  to  impound  such 
cattle,  horses,  sheep  and  swine  as  were  found  within  the  com- 
mon field.  The  owners  of  the  imprisoned  beasts  were  obliged 
to  pay  the  poundage ;  but  if  it  appeared  that  the  fence  was 
more  at  fault  than  the  beasts,  those  who  had  thus  paid  their 
money  could  oblige  the  delinquent  fence  owners  to  bear  the 
loss. 

Here  are  regulations  concerning  the  common  gates  or  bars, 
the  "  baighting  "  of  cattle,  &c.  : 

Dec.  12th,  1704,  "the  propriators  by  uoate  agreed  y'  he  y'  lefs  [leaves]  opin 
y*  com~on  gates  or  bcrs  [bars]  in  y«  com~on  feild  should  pay  al  y«  damag  y' 
is  dun  thereby  and  y'  no  man  shal  stak  horses*  in  y«  moing  land  in  said  feild  or 
baight  cattell  after  y«  first  of  aprill  till  combing  timef  except  they  are  at  work  by 
y"  [them]  and  the  fenc  of  s"*  feild  to  be  kcept  up  al  y«  yeir  and  hogs  pound 
fesiaut  al  y«  yeir 

*  A  horse  was  gtakedby  making  him  fast  to  astalie  driven  into  the  ground,  by  means  of  a  rope 
or  cord  several  yards  in  length.  He  could  thus  be  safely  left  to  feed  around  for  the  distance 
which  the  rope  would  permit  him  to  go.  When  the  grass  was  cropped  short  in  one  place,  the 
Btake  was  removed  to  another. 

t  Coramoning  time  was  the  time  fixed  upon  in  the  fall,  after  the  crops  had  been  removed, 
when  all  the  owners  in  the  common  field  turned  in  their  cattle  and  horses  for  pasture. 


60  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBURY. 

Jan  7*''  l706-'7.  The  propriators  agree  y*  when  s**  feild  shall  be  opened  to  turn 
in  cattell  it  shall  be  but  one  moneth  and  then  y«  cattle  kept  out  and  pounded  as  in 
y«  sum~er  and  y*  men  shall  turn  into  s'^  feild  according  to  their  intrist  in  it  and 
no  man  to  baight  or  stake  in  s''  field  at  no  time  but  on  his  own  land  and  takeing 
care  of  them  and  all  yi  brake  this  order  to  haue  their  cattle  pounded  or  delt  with 
as  trespasors. 

Four  years  afterward,  (or  March  5th,  1710-11,  "  it  was  grd 
[agreed]  on  by  note"  tliat  moneth^  (a  common  orthography  of 
the  day,)  in  the  above  record,  "  is  intended  for  munth  and 
with  that  amendation  the  act  so  stand  yearly  til  the  propriaters 
se  cas  [cause]  to  alter  it." 

Verily,  our  fathers  were  getting  critical !  The  former  clerk 
had  left  town,  and  a  wiser  one  had  succeeded  to  his  place. 
The  orthography  of  Thomas  Judd,  the  schoolmaster,  is  cor- 
rected by  his  cousin,  Thomas  Judd,  the  smith  ! 

Y«  propriators  [Dec  12th,  1704]  granted  liberty  to  any  y*  see  cans  to  inclos  in 
prticulor  [to  inclose  his  own  land]  for  wheat  or  other  corn 

This  right  was  secured  by  statute.  Any  man  might  fence  in 
his  own  land  and  thus  improve  it  exclusively ;  but  he  must  in- 
close it  at  his  own  expense.  If  a  man  adjoining  him  chose  to 
do  the  same  thing,  the  division  fence  must  be  built  by  both  in 
just  proportion. 

Desemb.  the  8  1707  it  was  uoated  that  nither  hors  nor  cattel  shold  be  baited  or 
staked  within  the  feeld  from  the  fifteenth  of  april  until  the  medows  are  clear 
furder  it  was  noted  that  each  propriator  shold  put  in  cretures  according  to  ther 
propotion  of  fence. 

In  the  fall  season  after  the  grass  had  been  cut  and  the  crops 
removed  from  the  common  field,  it  was  the  custom  to  turn  in 
the  "  cattle,  horses  and  sheep "  for  pasture.  It  w^as  the 
practice  to  name  the  day  on  which  the  fields  should  be 
"  cleared,"  and  when  the  people  might  turn  in  their  cattle, 
&c.  This  was  late  in  September  or  early  in  October.  "  Com- 
moning  time  "  was  looked  forward  to  with  great  interest. 
At  the  appointed  time,  early  in  the  morning,  or  immedi- 
ately after  sundown,  the  whole  town  was  astir.  All  the  four 
footed  beasts  that  lived  by  grazing  were  brought  out,  driven 
in  long  procession  to  the  meadow  gates,  and  "  turned  in  "  to 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY.  61 

crop  tlie  fresh  herbage.  There  they  remained  luxuriating  and 
gathering  fatness  till  the  late  autumnal  frosts.  The  writer's 
recollections,  extending  back  forty  years,  furnishes  him  with 
some  refreshing  scenes  connected  with  the  opening  of  the 
common  field.  Eoys  who  used  to  drive  the  cows  a  mile  to 
pasture,  hailed  the  time  with  lively  feelings. 

There  was  a  law  of  the  Colony,  at  an  earl}^  date,  requiring 
every  town  and  plantation  "  to  make  and  maintain  a  sufficient 
pound  or  pounds  for  the  impounding  and  restraining  of  all 
such  swine,  horses,  cattle  and  other  creatures,  as  shall  be  found 
damage  feasant,  and  swine  found  unringed  or  unyoked."  But 
the  first  record  of  the  "setting  up  "  of  a  pound  in  Waterbury 
is  the  following: 

Genuary:  'io'*":  1702-3  y«  town  uoted  y'  there  should  be  a  pound  set  up  in  y« 
South  highway  sum  where  neare  y*  south  gate  y*  spot  where  to  be  set  out  by  y« 
townsmen 

The  next  year  a  pound  was  ordered  near  the  west  or  common 
gate,  and  Deacon  Thomas  Judd,  who  lived  hard  by,  was  ap- 
pointed pound  keeper. 

Decembr  y«  12=1704  y«  propriators  gaue  juds  meadow  men  leaue  to  setup  a 
pound  for  ym  selues  on  their  own  charg  for  impounding  their  own  cattel  and  such 
as  are  left  out  in  y«  field  when  men  are  at  worck  with  them  there 

In  1735,  the  inhabitants  of  Korthbury  (now  Plymouth) 
were  authorized  by  the  town  to  erect  a  pound  at  their  own  ex- 
pense ;  and  in  Dec.  1749,  Northbury  and  "Westbury  (Water- 
town)  had  each  "  liberty  to  build  a  pound  at  town  charge."  In 
February,  1753,  Andrew  Bronson,  who  lived  on  the  southwest 
corner  of  West  Main  and  Willow  streets,  obtained  the  consent 
of  the  town  to  remove  the  pound  near  his  house,  "  farther 
westward  in  the  lane,"  he  being  at  the  expense. 

There  must  have  been  pounds,  or  yards,  for  the  confinement 
of  cattle,  &c.,  before  the  early  dates  above  mentioned,  as  the 
law  required.  Hay  wards  were  appointed  by  the  town  in  1681. 
The  pounds  ordered  to  be  set  up  in  1702-3  and  1704,  were 
probably  designed  to  take  the  place  of  one  or  more  of  more 
ancient  date,  which  had  gone  to  decay. 


HISTORY    or   WATERBUKY. 


CHAPTER    YL 


INDIAN  PURCHASES  :     INCORPORATION  OF  THE  TOWN  :     SEQUESTER 
LANDS. 

On  the  29th  day  of  April,  1684,  certain  Farmington  Indians, 
(nine  in  number,  including  two  squaws,)  "in  consideration  of 
nine  pounds  already  received,  or  good  security  for  that  pur- 
pose," granted  to  Serg.  Thomas  Judd  and  John  Stanley,  in  the 
name  and  behalf  of  the  proprietors  of  the  township  of  Matta- 
tuck,  an  addition  to  the  land  which  they  formerly  sold  to 
Major  Talcott,  Mr.  "Wadsworth,  &c.,  and  lying  north  of  it.  It 
extended  north  from  the  rock  called  Mount  Taylor  and  an  east 
and  west  line,  to  a  tree  marked  by  Captain  Stanley  and  John 
Norton,  Senr.,  being  eight  miles.  The  grant  butted  east  on 
Farmington  bounds,  south  on  the  former  grant,  (upon  that 
which  was  formerly  the  Spinning  Squaw's  land,)  west  by  a 
north  and  south  line,  which  if  extended  south  would  run  "four 
score  rods  from  the  easternmost  part  of  Quasepaug  Pond,"  north 
on  the  wilderness,  an  east  and  west  line. 

This  deed  purports  to  have  been  given  by  "  Patuckquo  in 
the  name  and  behalf  and  by  order  of  Atumtockquo,  Wa- 
wowas,  Taphow,  Judas,  Mantow,  Momantow's  squaw,  Mercy, 
Sequses  (squaw,)  and  Quatowquechuck  (Taphow's  son.)" 

In  the  same  year,  on  the  second  day  of  December,  John 
Acompound,  Hackatowsock  and  his  squaw,  Mantow,  Warun- 
compound,  Atumtocko,  Spinning  Squaw,  Patuckco  (squaw,) 
Sebockett,  the  same  persons,  for  the  most  part,  who  are  the 
grantors  named  in  the  deed  of  1674,  for  "  nine  pounds  in  hand 
received  or  security  sufficiently  given,"  conveyed  to  the  same 
party  "  one  parcel  of  land  at  Mattatuck  situated  on  each  side 
of  Mattatuck  River,  to  extend  from  the  said  river  three  miles 
towards  Woodbury,"  butting  north  on  the  rock  called  Mount 
Taylor,  and  a  line  running  east  and  west  from  that  point,  east 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY.  63 

on  Fcarmington  bounds,  the  line  running  from  the  rock  called 
the  "  Ordinary  "  south  to  Beacon  Hill  Brook,  or  Milford,  or 
New  Haven  bounds,  south  on  Beacon  Hill  Brook  and  Pau- 
gasset,  west  on  Pootatuck  and  Pomperaug. 

The  tract  of  land  here  conveyed,  it  will  be  noticed,  is  tlie 
same,  with  a  little  more  definite  limits,  as  that  granted  in  the 
deed  of  1674.  It  was  common  in  those  times  for  the  native 
proprietors  to  make  claims  to  the  lands  wliich  they  had  once 
sold,  on  the  ground  that  they  had  been  inadequately  paid,  or 
that  they  did  not  understand  the  import  of  their  acts. 

Feb.  28th,  1684,  (1685,  new  style,)  Conquapatana  (sagamore,) 
Awawas,  Curan,  Cocapadous,  Tataracum,  Kecasahum,  Wen- 
untacum,  Cocoeson,  "Wechamunck  and  Werumcaske  (Cocoe- 
sen's  sister,)  Arumpiske  (Curan's  squaw,)  Notanmnck  (Qur- 
an's sister,)  twelve  in  number,  of  the  Paugasset  or  Milford  tribe 
of  Indians,  as  I  suppose,  deeded  to  Thomas  Judd  and  John 
Stanley,  "  per  order  and  in  the  name  and  behalf  of  the  pro- 
prietors of  Mattatuck,"  "  for  divers  causes  and  considerations 
thereunto  moving  and  for  the  sum  of  six  pound  in  hand," 
twenty  parcels  of  land,  "  nine  parcels  on  the  east  side  of  Naiiga- 
tuck  River  southward  from  Mattatuck  town,  which  comprises 
all  the  land  below,  betwixt  Beacon  Hill  Brook  and  the  hither 
end  of  Judd's  meadows,  called  by  the  name  of  Sqontk,  and 
from  Naugatuck  Piver  eastward  to  Wallingford  and  New 
Haven  bounds,  with  all  the  low  lands  upon  the  brook  formen- 
tioned;  and  eleven  parcels  on  the  west  side  of  the  first  parcel," 
having  certain  relations  not  easy  to  understand,  to  Cedar 
Swamp,  the  middle  of  Toamtick  Pond,  Qnasepaug  Pond,  and 
"Woodbury  bounds  ;  at  the  north  part,  butting  east  on  "  Nau- 
gatuck  or  Mattatuck  Eiver,"  and  at  the  south  part,  east  on  the 
lands  fii-st  mentioned.  These  twenty  parcels  of  land  seem  to 
have  been  contiguous  tracts,  each  having  a  distinct  Indian 
name  given  in  the  deed,  and  lying  in  the  southern  and  south- 
western parts  of  the  township.  They  are  included,  it  will  be 
observed,  in  the  first  and  third  purchases  from  the  Farming- 
ton  Indians  ;  but  were  also  claimed,  it  appears,  by  the  Derby 
Indians.  Without  inquiring  very  particularly  into  the  justice 
of  the  claim,  it  was  thought  expedient  to  extinguish  it  by  pur- 
chase. 


64  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

On  the  28tli  day  of  June,  1711,  Cockapatane,  Sagamore  of 
"  Saugosset  "  and  Tom  Indian,  his  son,  for  twenty  five  shillings 
deeded  to  the  proprietors  of  Waterbury  "a  small  piece  of 
land  "  north  of  Derby  bounds,  west  of  Naugatuck  River  and 
south  of  Toantick  Brook, 

Thus  the  limits  of  ancient  Waterbury,  as  described  by  the 
several  deeds  from  the  Indians,  extended  from  north  to  south 
eighteen  miles,  and  from  east  to  west,  nine  miles  towards  the 
northern  line  and  six  miles  towards  the  south. 

The  territory  in  question  was  all  honestly  purchased,  most 
of  it  twice,  and  some  of  it  three  times.  And  it  was  bought 
not  with  baubles,  but  with  hard  cash.  However  it  may  have 
been  in  other  cases,  our  ancestors  did  not  get  possession  of 
their  lands  by  robbery,  or  finesse.  They  were  neither  "  filli- 
busters  "  nor  cheats.  What  they  had  of  this  world's  goods, 
which  was  but  little,  they  paid  for.  Doubtless,  those  who 
conveyed  their  lands  did  not  obtain  possession  by  a  method 
equally  just.  But  it  has  been  claimed  that  the  Indian  own- 
ers or  occupants  of  the  soil  did  not  know  the  significance 
of  a  deed  by  which  they  parted  with  their  titles,  and  could 
not  comprehend  the  consequences  of  their  acts.*  But  they 
did  know  what  a  sale  meant.  They  did  know  in  our  case, 
(as  there  are  the  best  reasons  to  believe,)  as  they  signed 
the  deeds  with  "  marks  uncouth,"  that  they  were  selling 
their  lands,  and  thus  giving  up  the  right  of  possession. 
And  as  for  consequences,  even  the  white  purchasers  had  but 
the  dimnest  notions.  Were  they  to  wake  up  from  their  long 
sleep,  and  see  what  our  eyes  behold  in  the  year  1857,  their 
astonishment  would  be  unmeasured.  Nor  w^as  the  price  paid 
so  entirely  disproportionate  to  the  thing  bought.  Sixty-three 
pounds — the  amount  of  all  the  purchase  money — was  to  the 
first  planters  of  Waterbury,  a  large  sum.  It  probably  repre- 
sented as  much  wealth  as  the  lands  would  have  sold  for  at  this 
day,  had  the  country  generally  remained  in  the  undisturbed 
possession  of  the  savages. 

Civilization,  industry,  skill  and  thrift  have  made  the  Nauga- 

*  Judge  Church's  Litchfield  Centennial  Address,  p.  26. 


Wild  e  r  II  f^  s  s 


tee/sisUrs 
ew  Haven 


THE     OLD  TOWT^SUIP 
OF  ^ AT?: R BURT. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY.  G5 

atuck  valley  what  it  is.  The  wealth  which  exists  here  to  clay 
has  been  created  by  their  agency.  The  soil  has  been  snbdued 
and  improved,  its  incnmbrances  removed  and  its  capacities 
developed.  Fences,  bridges,  roads,  railways,  mill-dams,  mills, 
factories,  store  houses  and  dwellings  have  been  built.  Quar- 
ries have  been  opened,  swamps  drained,  stones  removed  and 
trees  felled.  Farms  have  been  stocked  with  hoi-ses,  horned 
cattle,  sheep  and  swine.  Superior  grasses  have  been  introduc- 
ed and  orchards  planted.  The  Indians  did  none  of  these 
things — transferred  none.  Tliey  conveyed  the  naked  soil, 
(much  of  it  literally  naked,)  without  any  improvements,  and 
totally  unfitted  in  its  then  natural  state  for  the  abode  of  civil- 
ized men.  Tliey  sold  that  of  which  they  had  a  superfluity, 
and  which  they  were  incapable  of  putting  to  profitable  use. 
It  was  the  smallest  fraction  of  a  continent  running  to  waste, 
awaiting  a  purchaser  and  the  application  of  capital.  The 
value  which  po23ulation  and  cultivation,  labor,  skilled  and  un- 
skilled, invention,  science,  capital  and  commerce  have  given, 
should  be  kept  distinct  from  natural  and  inherent  value.  The 
former  our  fathers  did  not  purchase,  and  did  not  obtain,  and 
for  which  it  did  not  behoove  them  to  pay.  The  latter  they 
bought,  and  like  honest  men,  paid  for  it.  Tliey  thought  they 
gave  a  fair  equivalent — more  indeed,  perhaps,  than  they  would 
have  been  willing  to  give,  had  it  not  been  for  their  ignorance 
of  better  lands,  at  cheaper  rates,  farther  west,  and  in  other 
localities.  If  they  took  advantage  of  the  ignorance  of  the 
natives,  they  lost  more,  it  may  be  plausibly  said,  by  their  own 
lack  of  information.  At  any  rate,  for  many  long  years  they 
apparently  considered  their  bargain  a  hard  one  ;  and  most 
likely,  had  it  not  been  for  their  improvements,  would  have 
abandoned  the  settlement.  Many  did  so,  glad  to  escape  at  any 
necessary  sacrifice. 

The  wild  Indian  is  not  the  precise  being  he  is  represented 
in  many  works  of  romance.  He  has  been  painted  as  possess- 
ed of  certain  manly  traits,  and  the  truth  of  the  likeness,  illus- 
trated by  certain  examples.  But  his  general  character  is  quite 
the  reverse.  lie  is  given  to  lying,  cheating,  thieving.  He 
is  lazy,  thriftless,  faithless,  bloodthirsty.  He  lives  like  a  rob- 
ber and  a  vagabond.     His  cunning  and  his  courage  are  like 

5 


66  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBURY. 

tliose  that  belong  to  certain  beasts  of  prey.  The  only  restraints 
he  knows  are  those  imposed  by  indolence  and  fear.  Brought 
into  contact  with  a  civilized  people,  he  learns  all  their  vices,  but 
not  one  of  their  virtues.  He  becomes  a  drunkard — an  outcast. 
Every  persistent  attemj^t  to  civilize  and  Christianize  him  has 
resulted  in  the  annihilation  of  the  race.  He  is  essentially,  as 
is  now  generally  admitted,  untamable,  as  much  so  as  certain 
wild  animals.  Attempts  to  improve  him,  do  violence  to  his 
nature,  and  in  a  few  generations  sweep  him  out  of  existence. 
His  character  is  essentially  defective.  He  appears  to  lack  the 
moral  sentiments  necessary  to  a  higher  life.  These  the  appli- 
ances of  civilization  are  inadequate  to  supply.  I  admit  there 
is  a  diiference  in  different  tribes,  and  that  various  degrees  of 
partial  improvement,  among  certain  Indian  races,  have  some- 
times resulted  from  the  efforts  of  philanthropists.  Neverthe- 
less, that  the  general  fact  is  as  stated,  is  undeniable. 

The  Indian  titles  to  the  lands  proposed  to  be  included  in  the 
township  being  secured,  the  inhabitants  of  Mattatuck  were 
prepared  for  a  town  patent,  or  act  of  incorporation.  They 
presented  a  petition  to  the  General  Court  at  the  May  session 
of  1685,  praying  for  "a  Patent  for  the  confirmation  of  their 
lands  unto  the  present  proprietors."  They  chose  Serg.  Thomas 
Judd  and  Serg.  John  Stanley  "  Patentees  to  take  out  a  Patten 
for  the  townshijD."  Other  names,  however — those  of  Robert, 
Porter,  Edmund  Scott,  Isaac  Bronson  and  John  Welton — are 
inserted  in  the  instrument  itself. 

Probably  the  application  was  made  at  this  particular  time 
on  account  of  the  critical  condition  of  the  Colony.  James  II 
had  ascended  the  throne  of  England  and  nothing  good  w^as 
expected  from  his  reign.  There  was  some  delay,  however,  in 
obtaining  the  patent.  In  the  mean  time,  three  successive 
writs  of  quo  warranto*  were  served  on  the  Governor  and  Com- 
pany of  the  Colony,  and  it  became  evident  that  the  Charter 
was  doomed.  The  inhabitants  of  Connecticut  were  of  course 
greatly  alarmed.  The  people  of  the  dififerent  towms  and  settle- 
ments were  in  haste  to  get  their  land  titles  and  town  franchises 
secured  by  a  patent  from  the  local  government,  in  anticipation 

*  A  warrant  requiring  the  party  summoned  to  appear  in  court  and  show   by  what  authority 
the  powers  of  government  were  exercised. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKY,  67 

of  its  dissolution.  Thus  they  hoped  to  save  themselves  from 
the  extortionate  demands  of  royal  governors.  The  General 
Court  had  authorized  the  governor  and  secretary  of  the  Col- 
ony, in  May,  16S5,  "  to  give  patents  and  deeds  to  the  proprie- 
tors of  every  township  of  all  lands  and  rights,"  &c.  All  the 
towns  then  existing  availed  themselves  of  the  privilege,  and 
the  new  plantation  seized  the  opportunity  to  gain  a  similar 
grant. 

Mattatuck  was  invested  with  town  privileges,  in  the  usual 
way.  May,  1686.     Here  is  the  form  : — 

This  Court  Grants  that  Mattatuck  shall  be  and  belong  to  the  county  of  Hartford 
and  the  name  of  the  plantation  shall  for  the  future  be  Waterbury.  [May  13,  1086.] 

The  new  town  took  the  name  of  Waterbury  on  account  of 
its  numerous  rivers,  rivulets,  ponds,  swamps,  "  boggy  mead- 
ows "  and  wet  lands.  Bury  is  another  way  of  spelling  borough 
orburg,  and  signifies  a  dwelling  phice.  It  is  a  pity  the  beau- 
Tiful  oIcTTndiaii  name  of  Mattatuck  was  not  retained.  But 
our  Puritan  ancestors  regarded  these  native  words  as  heathen- 
ish, and  were  in  haste  to  discard  and  forget  them.  Latterly, 
they  have  been  in  some  cases  revived  and  applied  to  the  new^ 
towns,  to  corporations  and  various  local  institutions  and  objects. 
Our  friends  down  the  river  showed  their  good  sense  when  they 
called  their  new  town  Naugatuck,  (another  beautiful  name,) 
where  the  second  settlement  in  the  valley  was  made. 

Sir  Edmund  Andros,  of  charter  memory,  arrived  in  Boston, 
Dec.  1686.  A7aterbury's  patent  was  issued  soon  after,  bearing 
"date  Feb.  8th,  1686-7. 

Whereas  the  Generall  Court  of  Connecticut  liaue  formerly  Granted  unto  the 
inhabitants  of  Waterbury  all  those  lands  within  these  abutments  viz  upon  New 
Haven  in  part  &  Milford  in  part  &  Derby  in  part  on  the  south  &  upon  Woodbury 
in  part  &  upon  the  comons  in  part  on  the  west  &  upon  Comon  land  on  the 
North:  &  east  in  part  upon  farmington  Bounds  &  in  part  upon  the  comons  &  from 
the  South  to  the  north  line  extends  Thirteen  Miles  in  length  &  from  farmington 
Bounds  to  Woodbury  about  nine  Miles  breadth  at  the  North  &  some  what  less  at 
the  South  end  the  sayd  lands  hauing  been  by  purchass  or  otherwise  lawfully  ob- 
tayned  of  the  native  proprietors,  And  whereas  the  proprietors  Inhabitants  of  Wa- 
terbury in  the  colony  of  Connecticut  in  Newengland  haue  made  application  to  the 
Governor  &  company  of  the  sayd  colony  of  Connecticut  assembled  in  Court  the 
fourteenth  of  may  one  Thousand  Six  Hundred  &  Eighty  fine  that  they  may  haue 
a  patent  for  the  confirmation  of  the  afoarsavd  lands  as  it  is  Butted  &  Bounded 


68  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBUKY. 

afoarsayd  unto  the  present  proprietors  of  the  sayd  Township  of  Waterbury  -which 
they  haue  for  some  years  past  enjoyed  without  Interruption  Now  for  more  full 
confirmation  of  the  premises  &  afoarsayd  Tract  of  land  as  it  is  butted  and  Bound- 
ed afoarsayd  unto  the  present  proprietors  of  the  Township  of  Waterbury  Know 
yoe  that  the  sayd  Gov  &  company  assembled  in  Generall  Court  according  to  the 
commission  granted  to  them  by  our  late  Soveraign  Lord  King  Charles  the  Second 
of  the  blessed  Memory  in  his  letters  patent  bearing  date  the  Three  &  Twentyeth 
day  of  April  in  the  fourteenth  year  of  his  Sayd  Ma''«'  Reigne  haue  given  and 
Granted  &  by  these  presents  doe  giue  grant  rattify  &  confirm  unto  Thomas  Judd 
John  Standly  Robert  Porter  Edmund  Scott  Isaac  Brunson  John  Wilton  &  the  rest 
of  the  proprietors  Inhabitants  of  the  Towne  of  Waterbury  &  their  heirs  &  assigns 
forever  &  to  each  of  them  in  such  proportion  as  they  haue  already  agreed  upon 
for  the  diuision  of  the  Same  all  that  a  foarsayd  Tract  of  land  as  it  is  butted  and 
Bounded  together  with  all  the  woods  uplands  arable  lande  meadows  pastures  ponds 
waters  Riuers  fishings  foulings  mines  Mineralls  Quarries  &  precious  Stones  upon 
and  within  the  sayd  Tract  of  lands  with  all  other  profits  and  comodities  tnere- 
unto  belonging  or  in  any  wise  appertaining  &  we  doe  also  Grant  unto  the  afore 
named  Thomas  Judd  John  Standly  Robert  Porter  Edmund  Scott  Isaac  Brunson 
John  Wilton,  &  the  rest  of  the  p'sent  proprietors  Inhabitants  of  Waterbury 
there  heirs  and  assigns  foreuer,  that  the  foresayd  Tracts  of  land  shall  be  foreuer 
hereafter  deemed  reputed  &  be  an  Intire  Township  of  it  Selfe  to  haue  &  to  hold 
the  sayd  Tract  of  lands  &  premises  with  all  &  Singular  their  appurtenances 
together  with  the  priviledges,  Immunities  &  franchises  herein  given  &  granted 
to  the  sayd  Thomas  Judd  John  Stanly  Robert  Porter  Edmund  Scott  Isaac 
Brunson  John  Wilton  &  others  the  present  proprietors  Inhabitants  of  Wa- 
terbury their  heirs  assigns  &  to  the  only  proper  use  and  behoofe  of  the 
sayd  Thomas  Judd  John  Standly  Robert  Porter  Edmund  Scott  Isaac  Brunson 
John  Wilton  &  the  other  proprietors  Inhabitants  of  Waterbury  their  heirs 
&  assignes  forever  according  to  the  Tennore  of  his  Ma^'^s  Manor  of  East 
Greenwich  in  the  County  Kent  in  the  Kingdom  of  England  in  fee  &  common' 
soccage  &  not  in  capitee  nor  Knight  seruice  they  yeilding  &  paying  therefore  to 
our  Soverigne  Lord  the  King  his  heirs  &  successors  onely  the  fifth  part  of  all 
the  oare  of  Gold  &  Silver  which  from  time  to  time  &  at  all  times  hereafter  shall  be 
there  gotten  had  or  obtained  in  Lue  of  all  rents  services  dutys  &  demands  what- 
soever according  to  the  charter  in  witness  whereof  we  have  here  unto  affixed  the 
seal  of  the  Colony  this  eighth  of  febuary  in  the  Third  year  of  the  reign  of  s"* 
Soueraigne  lord  James  the  Second  by  the  grace  of  God  of  England  Scotland  france 
&  Ireland  King  defender  of  the  fay  the  of  o^  Lord  1686: 
Pr  order  of  the  Generall  Court  of  Connecticut 

John  Alltn  Secret'y 

At  the  May  session  of  the  General  Court,  in  1703,  the  Wa- 
terbury patent,  as  well  as  the  patents  of  the  other  towns  in  the 
Colony,  was  confirmed  in  the  following  act : 

Whereas  the  Court  did  authorize  May  14,  1685,  the  Governor  &  Secretary  of 
the  Colony  to  give  Patents  or  deeds  to  the  proprietors  of  every  township  [&c]  of 
all  lands  &  rights  [&c]  &  did  ratify  all  sequestrations,  and  donations,  [&c.]  it  is 
hereby  enacted  that  the  several  above  mentioned  lands  with  all  the  rights  [&c.] 


HISTORY   OE   WATERBURY.  69 

contained  in  the  above  mentioned  Pattents  shall  be  &  remain  full  &  clear  estate  to 
the  Proprietors  of  the  respective  towns  mentioned  [&c.]  &  the  lands  sequestered  & 
given  to  pubUc  and  pious  uses  shall  remain  forever  for  the  same,  [&c.] 

At  the  October  session  of  1720,  the  proprietors  of  Water- 
bury  petitioned  that  a  new  "  deed  of  release  and  quit  claim  of 
and  in  the  lands  within  the  town  may  be  granted  and  be  signed 
and  sealed  by  the  Honorable  the  Governor  and  the  Secre- 
tary." The  petition  was  granted  and  a  patent  furnished  in  a 
m(5re  approved  and  ample  form. 

One  reason  for  this  new  deed  appears  to  have  been  the  neg- 
lect to  enter  the  names  of  all  the  proprietors,  the  grantees,  in 
the  former  deed.  Other  reasons  were  probably  found  in  the 
irregular  practices  and  informal  proceedings  of  the  pro- 
prietors in  disposing  of  their  lands,  hereafter  to  be  noticed. 
Tlie  original  patent,  in  the  hand  writing  of  Mr.  Soutlnnayd, 
(except  the  date  and  signatures,)  is  in  the  writer's  possession  : 

To  all  people  to  whom  these  presents  shall  come,  the  Governor  and  Company  of 
the  English  Colony  of  Connecticut,  in  New  England  in  America,  send.  Greeting,  &c. 

Know  Ye,  that  whereas  all  the  lands  contained  within  these  abutments,  Viz. 

beginning  at  a  certain  chestnut  tree  marked  and  stones  about  it,  which  is  Water- 
bury's  south  west  corner  and  Woodbury's  south  east  corner,  thence  running  north- 
ward thirteen  miles  to  a  small  white  oak  tree  marked  with  divers  letters,  and  a  heap  of 
stones  about  it,  which  tree  is  Waterbury's  north  west  corner  and  Woodbury's 
north  east  corner,  thence  running  east  eight  miles  till  it  strikes  Farmington  bounds, 
thence  running  south  to  the  south  west  corner  of  Farmington  bounds,  thence  east 
till  it  comes  upon  Wallingford  bounds,  and  from  thence  a  straight  line  to  a  certain 
chestnut  tree,  known  by  the  name  of  the  three  sisters,  which  tree  is  Waterbury's 
south  east  corner,  &  Wallingford's  south  west  corner,  New  Haven's  north  west 
corner,  and  Milford's  north  east  corner,  thence  westerly  a  mile  and  six  score  rods 
to  Milford's  north  west  corner,  thence  south  to  Beacon  Brook,  thence  westward  as 
the  brook  runs,  to  a  great  rock  marked  on  the  west  side  of  Naugatuck  River, 
thence  a  straight  line  to  the  twelve  mile  stake,  thence  west  to  forementioned  tree 
which  is  Waterbury's  south  west  corner  and  Woodbury's  south  east  corner,  and 
is  about  five  miles  and  a  half  in  breadth  at  the  south  end  of  the  bounds,  butting 
west  on  Woodbury,  north  in  part  on  Litchfield  and  in  part  on  country  land,  to 
the  east  in  part  upon  Farmington  and  in  part  upon  Wallingford,  to  the  south  in 
part  upon  Milford  and  in  part  upon  Derby. — Were  purchased  and  lawfully  obtain- 
ed of  the  Indian  native  proprietors,  and  have  been  possessed  and  improved,  for 
the  space  of  more  than  forty  years,  by  the  persons  whose  names  are  hereafter 
mentioned,  being  present  inhabitants  and  proprietors  of  Waterbury,  in  the  Coun 
ty  of  Hartford  and  Colony  of  Connecticut  aforesaid. 

And  Whereas  King  Charles  the  second,  our  late  sovereign  lord  of  England,  &c., 
by  letters  patent,  under  the  great  seal  of  England,  by  writ  of  privy  seal,  bearing 
date  the  twenty  eight  day  of  April,   in  the   fourteenth  year  of  his  reign,  did  give 


70  HISTOEY   OF   WATEKBUKT. 

and  grant  and  confirm  unto  us  the  said  Governor  and  Company  all  the  lands  with- 
in the  Colony  aforesaid,  in  which  those  lands  are  included,  and  the  said  Governor 
and  Company  did  in  the  year  one  thousand  six  hundred  and  eighty  five.  May  the 
fourteenth,  grant  letters  patent  for  the  land  above  s"^  to  Thomas  Judd,  Esq.,  John 
Stanley,  Edmund  Scott  Isaac  Bronson,  and  John  Welton,  and  others  the  then  in- 
habitants of  Waterbury,  whose  names  should  have  been  then  enrolled  but  were 
not, — For  this  and  other  reasons  and  good  causes,  the  said  Thomas  Judd,  Esq., 
and  other  the  inhabitants,  proprietors  of  Waterbury,  now  moving  to  us  the  Gov- 
ernor and  Company  in  general  court  assembled,  for  the  more  sure  making  and 
firm  establishing  of  the  rights  to  us  given  of  the  lands  aforesaid  unto  them  accord- 
ing to  the  several  descents,  devises,  grants,  divisions,  agreements,  to  them  fallen, 
given,  made,  concluded,  purchased,  or  purchases  by  them  made  or  procured,  ac- 
cording to,  or  as  are,  to  be  found  in  their  town  records,  from  time  to  time,  as  they 
come  to  the  said  Thomas  Judd,  and  all  other  the  inhabitants,  proprietors  of  Wa- 
terbury, whose  names  are  hereafter  declared,  and  whereby  their  several  rights, 
proprieties  and  properties  and  proportions  are  distinguished  whether  holden  by 
them  in  fee  simple  or  fee  tail,  or  considered  for  life,  or  lives,  or  years,  in  severalty, 
or  as  tenants,  joint-tenants,  or  as  partners — 

Now  Know  Ye  that  we  the  said  Governor  and  Company  in  General  Court  assem- 
bled, by  virtue  of  the  letters  patent,  to  us  given  by  our  sovereign  lord  King  Charles 
the  second,  of  happy,  blessed  memory,  have  granted,  remised,  released  and  quitted 
claim,  and  by  these  presents,  do  fully  and  absolutely  for  us  and  our  successors, 
give,  grant,  remise,  release,  and  altogether  for  us  and  our  successors,  quit  claim, 
ratify,  approve  and  confirm  in  the  quiet  and  peaceable  and  firm  seizin  and  posses- 
sion of  the  said  Thomas  Judd,  Esq.,  John  Stanley,  Edmund  Scott,  Isaac  Bronson, 
John  Welton,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd,  Esq.,  John  Southmayd,  Timothy  Stanley,  John 
Hopkins,  Abraham  Andruss,  Sen.,  John  Richards,  Edmund  Scott,  the  heirs  of 
Abraham  Andruss,  Jr.,  the  heirs  of  John  Newell,  the  heirs  of  John  Carrington, 
the  heirs  of  Daniel  Warner,  John  Scovill,  Sen.,  Thomas  Judd,  the  heirs  of  Joseph 
Gaylord,  the  heirs  of  John  Bronson,  Daniel  Porter,  Sen.,  the  heirs  of  Philip  Judd,' 
Thomas  Newell,  Jeremiah  Peck,  Jonathan  Scott,  Sen.,  Richard  Porter,  Stephen 
Upson,  Sen.,  the  School,  the  Parsonage,  Samuel  Stanley,  Isaac  Bronson,  William 
Hickox,  Thomas  Hickox,  Samuel  Scott,  Ephraim  Warner,  Thomas  Upson,  Thomas 
Andruss,  John  Bronson,  Thomas  Richards,  Sen.,  John  Barnes,  Benjamin  Warner, 
Thomas  Bronson,  Ebenezer  Bronson,  Samuel  Porter,  Obadiah  Scott,  the  heirs  of 
Thomas  Welton,  George  Welton,  the  heirs  of  Stephen  Welton,  Ebenezer  Hickox, 
Jr.,  Stephen  Upson,  Jr.,  the  heirs  of  John  Richards,  Jr.,  Thomas  Barnes,  Samuel 
Warner,  Sen.,  John  Scovill,  Jr.,  Ebenezer  Richason,  Thomas  Clark,  George  Scott, 
Jr.,  David  Scott,  Sen.,  Jonathan  Scott,  Jr.,  John  Welton,  Jr.,  the  heirs  of  John 
Richason,  Stephen  Hopkins,  Joseph  Lewis,  WiUiam  Judd,  Daniel  Porter,  Jr.,  the 
heirs  of  John  Judd,  Timothy  Hopkins,  George  Scott,  Sen.,  Joshua  Peck,  Richard 
Welton,  Benjamin  Warner,  Sen.,  Daniel  Shelton,  Joseph  Prime,  Josiah  Piatt, 
James  Fenn,  Moses  Blachly,  [Blakeslce,]  John  Prout,  Thomas  Furney,  [Turney,] 
Joseph  Moss,  Israel  Moss,  Richard  Bronson,  the  heirs  of  Samuel  Howard,  Eliza- 
beth Wilson,  Joseph  Birdsey,  the  heirs  of  Thomas  Richason,  John  Read,  James 
Brown,  the  heirs  of  Serg.  Jamuel  Hickox,  Hezekiah  Rew,  Ebenezer  Hickox,  Sen., 
Samuel  Mix,  Silvanus  Baldwin,  James  Blachly,  [Blakeslee,]  Samuel  Barnes,  James 
Poisson,  Samuel  Warner,  the  heirs  of  Obadiah  Richards,  the  heirs  of  Obadiah 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBURY.  71 

Scovill,  John  Stanley,  the  whole  right,  title  and  claim  which  we  have  in  or  unto  all 
the  above  said  tract  of  land,  bounded  as  abovesaid,  with  all  the  buildings,  fences, 
orchards,  trees,  wood,  timber,  underwood,  stones,  precious  stones,  quarries,  mines, 
minerals,  lands,  uplands,  pastures,  marshes,  arable  lands,  meadows,  swamps,  rivers, 
brooks,  creeks,  ponds,  springs,  waterings,  islands,  upon  or  within  the  above  said  tract 
of  land,  and  with  the  rights,  members,  appurtenances,  hereditaments,  and  the  rever- 
sion and  reversions,  remainder  and  remainders,  royalties,  privileges,  whatsoever,  of 
into,  within  and  out  of  the  premises,  and  any  and  every  part  and  parcel  of  the  same, 
to  them  and  every  of  them,  their  heirs  and  assigns  forever,  according  to  their  and 
each  of  their  several  parts,  portions,  proportions,  shares,  rights  and  interests,  in, 
of  and  unto  the  lands  above  described,  to  be  distinguished  according  to  their 
several  descents,  devises,  grants,  divisions,  agreements,  and  purchases,  as  of  record 
appcareth,  and  by  records  of  said  town  of  Waterbury  may  be  seen,  (reference 
thereunto  being  had,)  in  this  instrument —  To  have  and  to  hold,  to  them 
the  said  Thomas  Judd,  Esq.,  John  Stanley,  Edmund  Scott,  Isaac  Bronson,  John 
Welton,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd,  John  Southmayd,  Timothy  Stanley,  John  Hopkins 
and  all  others,  the  inhabitants,  proprietors  of  Waterbury,  whose  names  have  been 
above  declared,  and  to  their  and  each  of  their  heirs,  according  to  each  one's 
several  proportions  aforesaid,  to  their  proper  use,  benefit  and  behalf  for  ever. 

And  whereas,  there  is  in  the  actual  seizin  and  possession  of  the  said  Thomas 
Judd,  John  Stanley  and  others,  the  inhabitants  and  proprietors  of  Waterbury, 
sundry  lands  within  the  limits  above  described,  called  and  known  by  the  name  of 
sequestered  lands,  sequestered  by  vote  of  the  town  of  Waterbury  and  reserved 
for  the  town's  use,  intended  to  be  improved  and  used  by  the  inhabitants  of  said 
town  as  commonage,  for  the  common  and  general  feeding  of  cattle,  for  firewood, 
timber,  stone,  and  any  and  all  other  the  profits  and  conveniences  thereof,  without 
any  regard  to  the  distinction  of  shares,  rights,  proportions  of  interests,  or  property  in 
the  said  lands — therefore  upon  motion  made  to  us  by  the  said  present  proprietors 
of  Waterbury — We  the  Governor  and  Company  of  the  English  Colony  of  Connect- 
icut, in  New  England,  in  America,  in  General  Court  assembled,  do  for  ourselves 
and  our  successors,  fully,  freely  and  absolutely,  remise,  release,  quit  claim,  ratify, 
approve  and  confirm,  in  the  quiet  and  peaceable  and  firm  seizen  and  possession  of 
the  said  Thomas  Judd,  John  Stanley,  Isaac  Bronson,  John  Welton,  Capt.  Thomas 
Judd,  John  Southmayd,  Timothy  Stanley,  John  Hopkins,  and  all  other  the  pres- 
ent proprietors,  inhabitants  of  Waterbury,  as  have  been  before  named — the  whole 
right,  title  and  claim  that  we  have  had,  or  have  in  or  unto  the  said  sequestered 
lands  above  described,  limited  and  bounded,  as  the  records  of  the  town  of  Wa- 
terbury will  more  fully  show,  (reference  thereunto  being  had,)  To  have  and  to 
hold,  to  them  the  said  Thomas  Judd,  John  Stanley  and  others  the  proprietors 
above  named,  their  heirs,  successors  and  assigns,  in  equal  proportion,  as  town 
commons,  to  be  ever  improved,  used  and  occupied  by  them,  the  parties  above 
named,  their  successors  and  assigns,  in  the  way  and  manner  above  set  forth, 
(which  was  the  design  and  intent  of  the  first  sequestration,)  without  any  distinc- 
tion and  particular  Hmitation  of  the  yearly  and  constant  profits  arising  therefrom 
to  the  several  proprietors  among  themselves,  and  never  to  be  impropriated,  grant- 
ed, divided,  or  taken  up  in  severalty,  until  three  quarters  of  the  proprietors,  inhabit- 
ants of  Waterbury,  shall  agree  thereunto. 

The  whole  of  what  is  in  this  instrument  above  released,  quit  claimed  and  con- 
firmed, To  holdoi  his  Magesty,  his  heirs  and  successors,  according  to  the  tenor  of 


7ii  HISTORY    OF    WATEKBUEY. 

his  Magesty's  Manor  of  East  Greenwich,  in  the  County  of  Kent,  in  that  part  of 
the  Kingdom  of  Great  Britian  formerly  called  England,  in  free  and  common  soc- 
cage,  rendering,  yielding  and  paying  therefor  to  our  sovereign  lord  the  King,  his 
heirs  and  successors,  for  ever,  only  the  fifth  part  of  all  the  oar  of  gold  and  silver 
which,  from  time  to  time,  and  at  all  times  hereafter,  shall  be  gotten  and  obtained, 
in  lieu  of  all  services,  duties  and  demands  whatsoever,  according  to  the  charter  of 
us  the  said  Governor  and  Company  granted,  without  any  manner  of  claim,  chal- 
lenge, or  demand  whatsoever,  to  be  had  or  made  by  us,  or  our  successors,  in  any 
manner  of  wise — 

In  witness  whereof,  we  have  caused  the  seal  of  the  said  Colony  to  be  hereunto 
affixed,  this  twenty  eighth  day  of  October  anno  Domo.  one  thousand,  seven  hun- 
dred and  twenty,  in  the  V***  year  of  the  reign  of  our  sovereign  lord  George  of 
Great  Britain,  France  and  Ireland,  King. 

G.  Saltonstall  Gov'. 

Hez.  Wyllys.  Secretary. 

It  is  manifestly  the  intention  of  the  above  deed  to  enumer- 
ate, as  grantees,  either  individually  or  as  the  heirs  of  certain 
persons,  ail  those  who,  at  the  time,  were  owners  of  land,  (or 
who  had  titles  of  land,)  divided  and  undivided,  in  the  town  of 
Waterbury.  Viewed  in  this  light,  the  catalogue  is  full  of  in- 
terest. The  five  patentees  of  1686  are  mentioned  in  the  begin- 
ning. Three  of  them  were  deceased.  With  the  exception  of 
these  and  of  those  persons  whose  "  heirs  "  are  referred  to,  the 
individuals  named  were  living  at  the  time.  Several  of  them 
(most  of  those  bearing  unfamiliar  names)  were  non-resident 
landholders.  The  following  persons  were  not  (and  never  had 
been)  residents  of  the  town  : 

Silvanus  Baldwin  of  Milford,  Joseph  Birdsey,  James  Blachly  of  New  Haven, 
afterwards  of  Litchfield  and  Waterbury,  Moses  Blachly  of  New  Haven,  afterwards 
of  Waterbury,  Richard  Bronson  of  Woodbury,  James  Brown  of  New  Haven,  after- 
wards of  Waterbury,  James  Fenn  of  Milford,  Samuel  Howard  (heirs,)  Samuel 
Mix  of  New  Haven,  Israel  Moss  of  Derby,  Joseph  Moss  of  Derby,  Josiah  Piatt  of 
Milford,  James  Poisson,  Joseph  Prime  of  Milford,  (Capt.)  John  Prout  of  New 
Haven,  John  Reed  of  "  Lonetown,"  Fairfield  County,  Hezekiah  Rew  of  Milford, 
Daniel  Shelton  of  Stratford  and  Ripton,  Thomas  Turney  of  New  Haven,  Elizabeth 
Wilson  of  Hartford,  (who  held  a  mortgage  on  land  of  John  Welton,  Jr.) 

The  patents,  it  will  be  observed,  make  Waterbury  thirteen 
miles  in  length.  As  for  breadth,  that  of  1686  describes  it  as 
nine  miles  at  the  northern  part,  and  somewhat  less  at  the 
south  ;  while  that  of  1720  speaks  of  it  as  eight  miles  broad  at 
the  north,  and  five  and  a  half  at  the  south  end.  These  descrip- 
tions very  essentially  curtail  the  limits  of  the  town,  as  they 


HISTOKY    OF   ^VATERBURY.  7d 

are  set  forth  by  the  Indian  deeds.  Probably  it  was  the  inten- 
tion of  tlie  grantors,  in  thus  describing  the  boundaries  of  the 
town,  to  avoid  the  possibiHty  of  encroaching  on  adjoining 
grants.  It  bordered  on  neighboring  towns  the  limits  of  which 
had  not  yet  been  certainly  determined.  In  truth,  nobody 
knew,  at  the  early  dates  of  which  I  am  speaking,  how  much 
territory  there  was  that  lay  north  of  the  Derby  line  and  be- 
tween the  Farmington  and  Wallinglbrd  bounds  on  the  east 
and  the  Woodbury  bounds  on  the  west.  As  the  limits  of  Wa- 
terbury  were  finally  settled,  the  town  extended  from  north  to 
south,  on  a  meridian  line,  seventeen  miles,  and  from  east  to 
west,  at  its  broadest  part,  nine  miles.  Towards  the  southern 
extremity  its  sides  approached,  so  that  on  the  Derby  and  Mil- 
ford  border  it  was  but  about  five  and  a  quarter  miles  across. 
Its  average  length  may  have  been  sixteen  miles,  and  its  aver- 
age breadth,  eight  and  one  third  miles.  It  could  not  have 
contained  less  than  one  hundred  and  thirty-three  square  miles, 
or  eighty-five  thousand  acres.  These,  divided  equally  among 
the  thirty-six  original  proprietors,  would  have  given  twenty- 
three  hundred  and  seventy  acres  of  land  to  each — a  pretty  fair 
landed  estate. 

The  limits  of  the  old  town,  as  above  defined,  comprehend 
the  present  towns  of  Waterbury,  Watertown  and  Plymouth, 
half  of  Wolcott,  a  small  part  of  Oxford,  the  greater  por- 
tion of  Middlebury,  more  than  a  third  of  Prospect,  and  nearly 
the  whole  of  Naugatuck.  This  tract  of  territory,  which  a  com- 
mittee of  the  colonial  government  estimated  as  suflicient  to 
maintain  thirty  families,  now  contains  a  poj)ulation  of  (say) 
fourteen  thousand  souls. 

In  consequence  of  the  lack  of  fixed  landmarks,  in  the  original 
deeds  and  patents  of  the  township,  AYaterbury  was  involved 
in  frequent,  protracted  and  expensive  controversies,  (which 
M'ere  sometimes  carried  to  the  Assembly  or  the  courts,)  with  the 
bordering  towns.  Throughout  its  entire  boundaries,  in  fact, 
there  seem  to  have  been  but  three  points  which  were  fixed, 
and  assented  to  from  an  early  period.  These  were  the  "  three 
sisters,"  (the  southeast  corner,)  the  mouth  of  Beacon  Hill 
Brook,  and  a  point  "  four  score  rods  from  the  eastermost  part 
of  Quassepaug  Pond,"  on  the  Woodbury  road.     The  length  of 


74  HISTORY    OF    WATEKBUKY. 

but  a  single  line,  (and  that  a  short  one,)  was  given,  till  after 
the  patent  of  1720.  This  line  ran  "  westerly  "  (that  is,  in  some 
direction,  towards  the  west)  one  mile  and  six  score  rods.  It 
began  at  the  "  three  sisters,"  a  point  which  had  been  settled 
as  the  Waterbury  southeast  corner  before  1720. 

The  following  extracts  from  the  colonial  and  town  records 
show  (in  part)  what  was  done,  from  time  to  time,  in  way  of 
settling  the  boundaries  between  Waterbury  and  other  towns : 

May  ys;  18:  1680:  thes  presents  may  srtefy  y^  gen'i  Court  or  whom  it  may  con- 
sern  y'  we  y^  agents  of  derby  being  desired  and  appointed  by  y^  inhabitants  of 
our  town  y«  30"^  of  aprill  (1680)  hauing  full  pour  to  conclude  a  loyn  place  or  pla" 
ces  of  bounds:  depending  betwixt  mattatock  and  derby  and  malce  a  final  issue  of 
ye  matter  before  it  corns  to  y«  generall  court  and  we  y«  agents  of  mattatock  Wil- 
liam iudd  Thomas  Judd  and  iohn  standly  iur:  being  appointed  by  our  committy  to 
gain  a  complyance  with  our  freinds  ioseph  haukins  and  able  gun  according  to  y^ 
tenor  of  y«  premises  so  fare  as  it  concerns  these  two  plantations  we  do  agree  y'  so 
ye  generall  court  may  giue  their  sanction  upon  it,  do  by  theis  presents  determine 
betwein  us  as  follows,  y'  y^  south  bounds  of  mattatock  do  begin  at  a  stack  at 
derbe  twelue  miles  end  and  from  y'  stack  to  extend  a  west  loyn  where  derby  and 
mattatock  shall  meet  Woodbury  bounds  and  from  y'  stake  afores''  att  the  end  of 
derbe  twelue  miles  to  go  with  a  straight  loyn  to  a  ston  marcked  with:  m:  on  ye 
north  sid  and:  d:  on  y^  south  sid  lying  on  ye  west  s"*  nagatock  or  mattatock  riuer 
and  from  y'  ston  to  ye  mouth  of  becon  hill  brook  where  it  falls  into  nagatock  or 
mattatock  riuer  and  y'  brook  to  be  ye  deuident  loyn  east  ward  between  mattatock 
and  derby  and  this  agreement  is  a  finall  issue  or  a  full  setteU  ment  of  ye  s"*  bounds 
of  mattatock  and  derby  which  is  to  all  intents  and  purposes  binding  to  them  their 
heirs  assigns  and  sucsesors  as  witness  our  hands  ye  day  and  date  aboue  men- 
tioned. 

derby  agents  Mattatock  agents 

Joseph  hawkins  William  iudd 

Able  gun:  Thomas  iudd 

John  standly  iur 

To  all  whom  it  may  concern  be  it  known  y'  we  herevnto  subscribing  as  agents 
in  ye  behalf  of  ye  Plantations  of  woodbury  and  mattatock  by  y®  motion  of  hon- 
ourable freinds  and  weighty  arguments  as  hereunto  inducing  haue  had  a  meeting 
upon  ye  29'''  of  iune  1680:  in  order  to  ye  setling  of  boundarys  betwein  ye  s^i  two 
plantations  and  do  fully  and  unanimosly  agree  and  consent  as  foloweth  uiz  that 
there  be  a  loyn  run  du  east  from  ye  westermost  part  of  ye  bounds  agreed  and 
concluded  between  mattatock  and  derby  to  mattatock  riuer  and  so  y'  loyne  to  be 
run  from  y®  s"*  riuer  too  miles  and  twelue  scor  rods  due  west  and  then  a  loyn 
from  ye  eastermost  part  of  ye  great  pond  commonly  called  or  known  by  ye  name 
of  quassapaug  from  such  a  part  of  ye  pond  as  by  us  already  agreed  on  four  score 
rods  due  east  and  then  a  straight  loyn  from  ye  four  score  rod  to  ye  a  fore  sd  west 
corner  betwein  derby  and  mattatock  and  from  ye  afore  sd  coner  or  four  scor  rod 
due  east  from  y®  forsd  pond  ye  bounds  is  agreed  and  concluded  to  run  due  north 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUEY.  75 

to  ye  extent  northward  of  each  plantations  bounds  and  yt  this  our  niutall  agree- 
ment and  firm  settellment  of  y*  deuident  bounds  betwein  our  plantations  as  aforesd 
is  signified  by  our  subscribing  hereunto  this  twenty  ninth  day  of  iune  in  y^  yeir  of 
our  lord  sixteen  hundred  and  eyghty. 

Thomas  Judd  John  Minor 

Isriell  Curtis  William  Judd 

John  Standly  iur  Joseph  Judsou 

May  1681.  This  Court  haue  granted  that  the  bounds  for  the  plantation  of  mat- 
tatuck  shall  runn  eight  miles  north  from  the  town  plott,  as  their  stated  bounds  and 
doe  confirme  and  rattify  the  boundaryes  agreed  upon  by  Mattatuck  and  Wood- 
bury plantations  and  the  boundaries  agred  upon  between  Mattatuck  and  Derby 
inhabitants,  which  more  at  large  is  sett  down  in  their  subscribed  papers  by  the 
hands  of  the  committees  appoynted  by  each  plantation  and  Mattatock  bounds  on 
the  east  shall  be  upon  Farmiugton  bounds.* 

i\.prill^j'''=1703.  Wee  agree  as  followeth  for  boundrys  betwein  derby  and 
Waterbury  to  run  west  ward  from  ye  marked  ston  or  y®  west  sd  y^  riuer  to  a  stone 
or  rock  on  y"  straight  mountain  with  stones  layd  on  it  and  to  run  a  straight  loyn 
to  ye  twelue  mile  stake  and  then  run  west  from  s^  stake  by  marked  trees  and  sta- 
tions T  a  red  oak  with  stones  layd  at  y^  botom  2  ly  a  white  oake  3"  ly  a  red  oake 
at  ye  noreast  s*"  of  to  antick  pond  4  ly  a  white  oake  on  a  long  redg  of  rocks  south 
west  from  toantick  pond 

for  Waterbury  for  derby 

Timothy  Stanly  Ebcnczer  Johnson 

John  hopkins  henery  Woster 

obadiah  Richards  Edward  Rigs 

We  hereunto  subscribing  agents  for  Woodbury  and  Waterbury  met  together 
March  26th,  1744,  and  began  at  the  known  boundary  east  of  Quassepaug  pond 
and  ran  a  line  north  two  degrees  west  a  straight  line  up  to  a  stake  with  a  heap  of 
stones  about  it  the  north  east  corner  of  Woodbury  bounds,  and  the  north  west 
corner  of  Waterbury  bounds,  and  haue  erected  monuments  in  about  eighty  rods 
distance  on  s''  line,  which  monuments  are  described  by  marking  trees  near  to  them 
with  44 

Ephraim  Minor       ^  Agents  Samuel  Hickox  )  Agents  for 

Thomas  Knowls      >     for  William  Judd    )  Waterbury 

Timothy  Hinman    )  Woodbury 

April  the  23^,  1765.  We  whose  names  are  hereunto  subscribed,  being  by  the 
towns  of  Milford  and  Waterbury  appointed  to  settle  the  north  and  west  lines  be- 
tween the  towns  of  Milford  and  Waterbury,  with  the  assistance  of  two  county 
surveyors  for  the  County  of  Xew  Haren — we  began  at  the  three  sisters  New  Haven 
north  west  corner,  Milford  north  east  corner,  Waterbury  south  east  [corner]  with 
Milford  and  from  said  corner  we  ran  a  due  west  line  one  mile  and  six  score  rods 
and  made  monuments  once  in  eighty  rods  and  at  the  end  of  said  line  we  made  a 
heap  of  stones  by  a  white  oak  staddle,  then  southward  forty  eight  rods  to  Derby 
north  east  corner,  the  south  side  of  Beacon  Hill  River,  which  hnes  we  do  agree 

*  Copied  from  Cothren's  Woodbury,  Vol.  I,  p.  53, 


ib  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUKY. 

and  establish  to  be  the  lines  between  the  towns  of  Milford  and  Waterbury.     Sign- 
ed in  Waterbury,  upon  the  above  date,  by  us 

John  Lewis               \  ^^^       ,  David  Baldwin  ^    

o.     1       TT            T     (  Waterburv  xx  ..  i   t,           ,  (  Milford 

Stephen  Upson,  Jr.  V  Aath'   iarrand  >■ 

„.  ,    ,           \  Committtee  -du-     i,      t>    i  \  Committee 

George  Nichols        )  Phinehas  Peck  ; 

March  27,  1768,  the  selectmen  of  Derby  and  Waterbury 
met  at  the  twelve  mile  stake,  and  measured  easterly  to  Beacon 
Hill  Brook  and  westerly  across  Toantick  Pond  to  the  Wood- 
bury line,  giving  distances  and  points  of  compass. 

It  was  customary  with  the  old  towns,  in  obedience  to  the 
statutes  provided  in  such  cases,  to  appoint  a  committee  of  two 
or  more  persons,  annuallj^,  whose  duty  it  was,  in  concert  with 
adjoining  towns,  "  to  perambulate  the  bounds,"  in  the  month 
of  March  or  April,  and  "  to  renew  the  monuments,"  or  bound- 
marks,  which  were  usually  heaps  of  stones  at  the  corners, 
and  once  in  eighty  rods  in  the  lines.  It  was  usual  also  to  mark 
the  trees  and  sometimes  the  stones,  as  guides  to  those  who 
might  follow.  Tlie  penalty  for  neglect  to  perambulate  was 
five  pounds.  During  the  controversy  with  Farmington,  about 
the  dividing  line,  Waterbury  passed  a  vote  that  it  would  not 
perambulate  with  her,  but  preferred  to  pay  the  fine.  This  was 
in  April,  17-i8. 

Previous  to  February,  1680-81,  all  legitimate  authority  in 
the  affairs  of  the  settlement  centered  in,  and  emanated  from, 
the  grand  committee.  At  this  time,  however,  they  relieved 
themselves  of  some  of  their  responsibilities,  and  conferred 
certain  powers  and  privileges,  relating  to  local  administration, 
upon  the  people  themselves. 

A  meeting  of  the  comity  for  mattatuck  febey  5  1680  att  farmington  itt  was  then 
determined  by  vs  that  thos  towne  ofesers  that  are  chosen  by  the  in  habitants  of  sd 
mattatuck  shall  execut  their  respectiue  ofeses  and  that  for  the  futur  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  place  being  orderly  called  and  conuened  by  their  maj''  voat  shall  haue 
liberty  to  chus  their  Tounsmen  Constables  suruayors  fence  viewers  and  haywards 
or  any  other  siuel  ofesers  from  time  to  time  without  any  further  order  from  the 
Comity. 

In  1682,  the  committee  farther  determined  that  the  inhab- 
itants should  have  power  to  make  regulations  concerning  the 
imj)Ounding  o±  cattle. 

After  these  dates,  the  committee,  having  got  the  infant  town 
upon  its  legs,  as  they  conceived,  gradually  withdrew  from  the 


HISTORY    OF    WATEKBURY.  Y7 

management  of  its  aifairs.  They  now  "  advised,"  in  cases  in 
wliicli  they  formerly  "  ordered."  They  continued,  however, 
to  make  proprietors,  to  regulate  the  conditions  of  preprietor- 
ship,  to  determine  questions  of  forfeiture,  and  to  make  special 
grants  of  land  for  the  common  good,  &c.  The  acts  of  the 
proprietors  relating  to  these  matters  had  no  force  until  approv- 
ed by  them.  Their  powers  did  not  terminate,  nor  were  their 
duties  entirely  at  an  end,  till  the  incorporation  of  the  town. 
In  October,  1685,  their  numtjer  had  been  reduced  by  death  to 
two,  a  minority  of  the  original  committee.  The  General 
Court  authorized  the  survivors  to  continue  their  functions,  as 
follows  : 

Oct.  1085.  This  Court  appoint  Major  Talcott  and  Mr.  Wadsworth  to  continue 
their  powers  as  Committee  for  Mattatuck,  notwithstanding  the  death  of  some  of 
their  number. 

The  last  official  act  of  the  committee  which  I  have  met  with 
on  our  records  is  one  relating  to  "  the  way  of  raising  rates  for 
defraying  of  the  public  charges,"  dated  Dec,  26,  1685.  It  is 
an  "  order,"  signed  only  by  Major  Talcott,  though  it  runs  in 
the  name  of  "  we."  There  is,  however,  a  "  request  and  desire," 
signed  by  the  "  friend  and  servant  [of  the  proprietors]  John 
Wadsworth,"  dated  Sept.  9, 1687,  which  asks  that  an  oversight 
in  laying  out  land  may  be  corrected. 

At  an  early  period,  the  proprietors,  noticing  that  their  lands, 
whicli  were  most  valuable  and  conveniently  situated,  were 
gradually  passing  into  the  hands  of  individuals  and  beyond 
the  control  of  the  people  at  large,  determined  to  provide  against 
tiie  possible  evils  which  might  result.  They  reserved  certain 
large  tracts  for  future  occasions  and  the  common  good. 

Geneu:  S""  86  y^  Town  by  uoate  granted  y'  all  y"  bogey  meadows  east  from  y* 
town  fence  too  miles  north  and  southward  from  y*  town  shall  be  sequestered  for 
common  lands  and  too  miles  east  from  \ «  afore  sd  fenc. 

Another  vote  appears  afterwards  to  have  been  passed,  on 
the  same  day,  which  sequestered  all  the  lands  in  the  limits 
mentioned,  making  them  common  lands. 

Gen:  3:  86  y«  town  detrmined  y'  all  y^  land  on  y"  east  sid  y«  fenc  Round  to  y« 
Mill  Riuer  so  to  y*  east  mountain  we  say  to  dauids  brook  and  to  y^  east  mountain 
all  ye  land  in  y'  compas  to  be  and  belong  as  common  land 

Several  years  afterwards,  still  another  vote  was  passed,  de- 
signed apparently  to  extend  and  explain  the  preceding. 


78  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURT. 

Genuory  y«  (j'^=l1( 

miles  from  t«  going  down  of  y«  hill  beyond  Thomas  hikcox*  hous  east  and  then 
from  it  too  miles  north  and  too  miles  south  and  then  to  run  at  each  end  west  to 
y«  common  fence. 

These  votes  gave  origin  to  the  terms  sequester  and  seques- 
tered lauds,  on  our  records.  Tlie  territory  described  lay  east 
of  the  village,  being  two  miles  broad  from  east  to  west  and 
four  long.  It  was  not  regularly  surveyed  till  April,  1716,  when 
Lieut.  Timothy  Stanley  and  William  Hickox  were  appointed 
to  lay  it  out.  It  was  set  aside,  irrevocably,  for  public  uses,  its 
benefits  to  be  enjoyed  by  the  inhabitants  in  common,  without 
any  reference  to  proprietory  ownership.  In  the  divisions  and 
grants  that  were  made,  from  time  to  time,  no  one  had  a  right 
to  locate  his  lands  within  its  boundaries.  It  furnished  pastur- 
age, fire-wood,  timber,  stone,  &c.,  for  all,  as  they  stood  in  need. 
In  several  instances,  when  the  public  interest  was  likely  to  be 
promoted,  grants  of  it  were  made  to  individuals  on  conditions. 

In  process  of  time,  it  was  found  that  lands  layed  out,  on  the 
supposed  sequester  line,  overlapped  and  encroached  upon  the 
sequestered  territory,  thus  giving  origin  to  conflicting  claims. 
To  settle  the  difficulty,  the  proprietors  voted,  in  1Y63,  that  all 
lands  laid  out  near  the  reputed  line  of  sequester,  should  remain 
good. 

The  sequester  lands  were  kept  sacred  for  many  years,  or 
were  granted  in  small  parcels  for  a  common  good.  At  length, ' 
however,  they  acquired  value,  and  it  was  not  so  easy  to  keep 
the  hands  off  tliem.  Eight  acres  were  distributed  to  each 
proprietor  in  1715.  In  1733,  a  vote  was  passed  to  have  a  reg- 
ular division ;  but  at  a  subsequent  meeting,  it  was  tbought 
"  likely  to  be  very  prejudicial  to  the  town  "  and  "  very  imprac- 
ticable ;"  so  the  former  vote  was  reconsidered.  In  January, 
1738-9,  however,  it  was  again  concluded  by  the  proprietors, 
to  have  a  division  of  the  sequestered  land.  One  quarter  of  an 
acre  on  each  pound  propriety  was  distributed.  This  oj^eration 
was  repeated  in  1759  and  afterwards,  till  the  reserved  lands 
were  exhausted.  I  have  not  succeeded  in  finding  the  evidence 
that  these  acts  of  the  proprietors  were  in  conformity  to  the 


*  Thomas  Hickox's  house  stood  on  East  Main  street,  near  the  house  of  the  late  Dr.  Joseph 
Porter. 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUET.  T9 

Assembly's  confirming  cact  of  1703,  and  to  the  town  patent  of 
1720.  By  the  confirming  act  "the  lands  sequestered  and 
given  to  public  and  pious  uses  [were  to]  remain  forever  for  the 
same  ;"  while  the  patent  declared  that  the  sequestered  lands, 
so  called,  should  "  never  be  impropriated,  granted,  divided,  or 
taken  up  in  severalty,  until  three  quarters  of  the  proprietors 
shall  agree  thereunto."  In  the  recorded  votes  ordering  the 
divisions  which  have  been  referred  to,  nothing  is  said  about 
"  three  quarters  of  the  proprietors  "  being  in  the  major  vote. 

Other  tracts  of  land  were  sequestered  at  difl:erent  times,  to 
prevent  a  too  rapid  appropriation  by  individuals.  There  was  a 
large  tract  in  the  northwest  quarter,  next  the  Woodbury  line, 
at  a  place  which  became  known  as  "  the  Village,"  and  after- 
wards as  "  Garnsey  Town,"  which  was  thus  reserved,  (I  know 
not  when.)  It  embraced  some  of  the  more  valuable  lands  of 
the  town.  It  was  finally  divided  among  the  proprietors,  the 
first  division  being  in  l^ov.  1722. 

March  13th,  1733,  a  tract  of  land  in  the  northwest  quarter, 
"  one  mile  and  a  half  each  way  from  the  centre,"  was  seques- 
tered for  the  town's  use.  The  tract  embraced  the  present  vil- 
lage of  Watertown.  Soon,  however,  the  restriction  was  taken 
oft'  this  territory. 


CHAPTER    YII. 


MILLS. 


In  all  new  settlements,  mills  for  grinding  grain  and  sawing 
logs  are  considered  as  things  of  the  first  necessity.  Tbey  are 
a  part  of  the  labor-saving  machinery  which  civilization  in- 
vented at  an  early  period.  They  perform  the  w^ork  of  many 
men,  and  do  it  more  perfectly  than  it  can  be  done  by  hand. 


80  HISTOKY    OF   WATEKBURY. 

Food  and  shelter  are  the  first  things  to  be  provided  for  in  a 
new  country,  and  these  mills  are  almost  essential  in  the  pre- 
paration of  the  materials.  Corn  can  be  pounded  in  a  mortar, 
or  crushed  between  stones ;  but  it  is  a  severe  task,  and  none  but 
a  primitive  people  will  long  submit  to  it.  Dwellings  can  be 
made  mainly  of  logs  prepared  by  an  axe,  with  the  assistance 
of  clay  and  straw  for  the  roof;  but  boards  and  other  "sawed 
stuff"  are  almost  essential  for  floors,  dooi-s,  &c.  Our  fathers, 
when  they  first  came  to  this  place,  must  needs  go  to  Farming- 
ton  for  all  their  mill-work.  They  must  travel  a  distance  of 
twenty  miles  through  a  pathless  wilderness,  or  waste  their  la- 
bor in  imperfect  attempts  to  supply  their  wants  at  home.  The 
only  way  to  escape  from  this  alternative  was  to  provide  mills 
of  their  own. 

The  State's  committee,  at  an  early  period,  took  this  matter 
into  consideration,  and  under  date  of  l^ov.  2Tth,  1679,  advised 
as  follows : 

We  doe  advise  the  inhabitants  to  build  a  sufficient  com  mill  for  the  vse  of  the 
towne  and  keepe  the  same  in  good  reparation  for  the  same  for  the  worck  and 
servis  of  grinding  come  and  for  incoragment  we  grant  such  persons  shall  haue 
thirty  [acres]  of  land  layd  out  and  shall  be  and  remain  to  them  and  their  heirs 
and  Asigns  for  euer  he  or  they  maintaining  the  said  grist  mille  as  aforsaid  for 
ever. 

Soon  after,  Stephen  Hopkins  of  Hartford,  erected  a  mill  on 
Mill  River  (so  called  from  this  use  of  it)  "for  grinding  corne." 
It  stood  where  the  Scovill  Manufacturing  Company's  rolling 
mill  now  is,  where  a  grain  mill  has  ever  since  remained  until 
within  the  last  twenty-five  years  or  so.  The  mill  being  built, 
the  committee  awarded  to  Hopkins  the  grant  w^hich  he  had 
become  entitled  to,  and  added  to  it  a  house  lot  of  two  acres,  a 
three  acre  lot  and  a  £100  allotment.  I  quote  from  the  record, 
under  date  of  Feb.  5th,  1680,  (1681,  K  S.) 

It  is  further  concluded  that  steuen  Hopkins  who  hath  builte  a  mile  att  that 
plantation  [mattatuck]  shall  haue  that  thirty  acrs  apointed  and  intailed  in  a  former 
order  to  such  as  shall  erect  a  mille  theare  and  so  much  more  land  aded  to  the 
sayd  thirty  acrs  as  may  aduance  the  same  to  be  in  value  of  one  hundred  pound 
alotment 

There  is  allso  a  house  lott  containing  in  estimation  to  acrs  granted  steuen 
Hopkins  as  conuenantly  as  may  be  to  suit  the  mile  and  the  for  said  Thomas  Judd 
and  John  Stanly  and  the  present  townsmen  to  lay  itt  out  to  him  and  allso  a  thre 
acre  lott:  acording  as  the  other  inhabitants  haue  granted  to  be  layed  out  by  these 
same  persons  for  him 


C'^^^^-i^6 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY.  81 

Aferwards,  (Aug.  8,  1682.)  the  town,  in  order  to  carry  out 
the  intentions  of  the  committee  in  relation  to  tlie  "  hundred 
pound  allotment," 

Granted  to  Stephen  Hopkins  that  alotnient  which  was  Decon  Langton's  with  the 
prouision  that  one  half  of  the  said  alotnient  shall  be  intailed  to  the  mill  as  the 
thirty  acres  is,  in  case  the  committy  grant  the  same,  causing  the  said  Hopkins  to 
subscribe  as  other  inhabytants  haue  don :  prouid  [ed]  also  this  grant  fre  us  from  all 
former  iniagments  respecting  the  miliars  Lott 

This  action  of  the  proprietors  was  ratified  by  the  committee, 
February  6th,  1682,  (1683  N.  S. ;)  but  John  Hopkins,  "  the 
present  miller,"  who  was  the  son  of  Stephen,  was  named  as 
the  grantee.     This  is  the  record  : 

In  referance  to  what  lands  are  granted  by  the  inhabitants  of  mattatuck  to  John 
Hopkins  the  present  miller  we  do  well  aprove  of  and  in  case  they  shall  see  cause 
to  ease  the  intaile  of  any  part  the  £100  Alotnient  we  shall  not  object:  against  itt 

The  result  of  all  this  action  was,  John  Hopkins,  "  his  heirs 
and  assigns,"  became  entitled  to  the  original  grant  of  thirty 
acres,  the  sole  condition  being  that  "  he  or  they  maintain  a 
grist  mill  for  ever."  He  also  became  the  owner,  by  grant,  of 
Dea.  Lankton's  propriety  and  allotments,  without  conditions, 
except  that  a  two  acre  lot  and  a  three  acre  lot  were  entailed  to 
the  mill  in  like  manner  "  as  the  thirty  acres  are."  To  remove 
all  doubt  and  misapprehension  in  relation  to  the  tenure  by 
which  the  Lankton  allotments  were  held,  a  vote  was  passed, 
after  the  town  was  incorporated,  of  which  the  following  is  a 
copy: 

Att  a  town  meeting  at  waterbury  december  :  30''  :  1687:  y*  town  granted  John 
hopkins  y*  alotnient  now  in  his  possesion  which  was  formerly  deac  langtons 
freely  and  absolutely  to  him  and  his  heirs  foreuer  exsepting  y'  allotment  in  Isaacs 
meadow  containing  three  acers  and  y'  too  acer  alotnient  in  hancox  meadow, 
which  still  abids  intayld  to  y®  mill  as  appears  by  y*  town  act  febeur  13:  1682: 
we  say  theis  too  lots  are  intayled  to  y*  mill  as  y«  30  acers  was  intayld  by  y®  com- 
mity.     [Pro.  Book.  Vol.  I,  p!  13.] 

Several  years  later,  a  misunderstanding  or  difficulty  appears 
to  have  arisen  between  the  miller  and  the  town,  possibly  in 
conserpience  of  the  dam  being  carried  away  by  the  floods,  and  a 
claim  made  upon  the  town  to  rebuild  it.  The  result  was  a 
compromise  and  an  agreement  signed  by  Hopkins  on  the  town 
book,  "  in  y«  presents  of  y*  town." 
6 


82  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBURY. 

Att  a  town  meeting  in  waterbury  genuary  30*  1699  or  700  y«  town  by  uoat 
ingaged  to  make  and  maintain  y«  mill  dam  from  y«  east  s"*  of  y*  cornmill  to  y®  hill 
on  y«  east  sid  y*  Riuer  for  teen  yeirs  on  theis  conditions  y'  y®  miler  make  and  keep 
ye  corn  mill  in  good  Repayer  to  do  y«  towns  worck  in  grinding  for  them  fifteen 
yeirs  and  maintain  y^  dam  from  y*  east  sid  y«  mill  to  y*  hill  on  y«  west  sid  of  y* 
mill  extriordinarys  exsepted. 

Boath  on  ye  towns  part  and  millers  in  y*  presents  of  y®  town  I  acsept  tbeyr  act 
and  they  doing  what  they  promis  I  ingage  to  do  min  in  makeing  and  main- 
taining the  mill  as  witness  my  hand  John  Hopkins 

But  the  causes  of  misunderstanding  were  not  yet  all  remov- 
ed. In  less  than  three  years  a  new  compromise  became  ne- 
cessary, and  John  Hopkins  signed  another  agreement  on  tlie 
town  book  "  in  presents  of  the  town."  This  relates  to  the  mill- 
place. 

Att  a  town  meeting  sep':  14:  1702:  where  as  there  has  bin  sura  dificulty  a  bout 
ye  mill  place  for  a  finall  issue  on  y^  same  y*  town  and  miller  agree  y'  y*  property 
of  ye  mill  place  be  and  remain  to  him  and  his  heirs  foreuer  as  ye  mill  land  is  he 
maintayniiig  a  mill  to  do  ye  towns  worck  for  euer  but  if  ye  miller  fayl  to  maintayn 
a  mill  to  do  ye  towns  work  in  grinding  theyr  corn  well  corn  being  sutable  to 
grind  then  ye  property  of  ye  mill  place  to  return  to  ye  town  and  priuiledges  of  it 
only  they  are  to  giue  ye  miller  a  resonable  price  for  what  is  his  own  on  ye  mill 
place  and  if  ye  town  and  miller  cannot  agree  to  be  prised  by  indefrent  men  in  tes. 
timony  of  my  complyance  with  ye  town  i  have  in  presents  of  ye  town  set  to  my  hand 

John  Hopkins 

The  matter  of  the  mill  place  being  settled,  as  a  part  of  the 
compromise,  probably,  the  following  vote  was  passed : 

Att  the  same  meting  the  town  agree  by  uoat  to  tak  of  [off]  the  remainder  of  in- 
tail  ment  layd  one  John  hopkins  medow  lot  [s  ?]  a  [and]  gife  him  lefe  to  re[cord] 
it  to  him  self  as  his  one  [own].     [Town  Book,  p.  103.] 

The  word  "  lot,"  in  the  preceding  vote,  must,  I  think,  have 
been  intended  for  lots.  If  so,  it  is  fair  to  conclude  that  the 
pieces  referred  to  are  the  meadow  tracts,  one  of  three  acres  in 
Isaac's  Meadow  and  one  of  two  acres  in  Handcox's  Meadow, 
which  were  a  part  of  Dea.  Lankton's  allotments.  This  view  is 
strengthened,  if  not  proved  to  be  the  correct  one,  by  the  fact 
that  soon  afterwards,  under  date  of  April  8,  1703,  tlie  two  lots 
in  question  were  recorded,  as  though  without  any  conditions, 
among  the  lands  belonging  to  John  Hopkins.  [L.  R.  Vol.  I,  p, 
1 7.]     The  mill  lands,  proper,  are  recorded  by  themselves. 

Genuary:  25th:  17<!§  ye  town  gaue  ye  miller  leaue  to  renioue  ye  8  acers  of  ye 
mill  lot  from  ye  pin  hool  and  take  it  where  it  suts  ouer  ye  mill  riuer 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBL'RY.  83 

For  aught  that  appears,  after  this,  for  a  considerable  time, 
matters  went  on  harmoniously  between  the  miller  and  the 
town,  the  one  "grinding  corn,"  and  the  other  bringing  "corn 
suitable  to  grind,"  each  party  thus  contributing  to  the  best 
good  of  the  other.  In  process  of  time,  however,  John  Hop- 
kins died  and  was  gathered  to  his  fathers,  having  been  town 
miller  for  fifty  years.  His  executors  and  sons,  Stephen  and 
Timothy  Hopkins,  January  17th,  1732-3,  in  consideration  of 
£350,  conveyed  to  Jonathan  Baldwin,  Jr.,  of  Milford,  all  their 
right  and  title  in  the  grist  mill  and  mill  place,  with  the  thirty 
acres  thereto  belonging,  lying  in  several  pieces,  viz,  fifteen 
acres  on  the  mill  plain,  eight  acres  on  the  Mad  River  by  the 
common  fence,  two  acres  over  against  the  mill,  one  acre  on 
this  side  the  river  by  the  mill,  two  acres  in  Isaac's  Meadow 
on  the  east  side  the  brook,  and  two  acres  towards  the  upper 
end  of  Hancox  Meadow.* 

For  many  years,  there  is  nothing  to  show  how  "  Jonathan 
Balwin,  Jr."  acquitted  himself  as  the  new  miller  ;  but  at  a  town 
meeting  held  Dec.  10th,  1753,  it  was  voted  to  raise  a  committee 
"  to  search  Into  the  scircumstances  of  the  mill  Land  and  see 
what  Tittle  Mr.  Baldwin  has  to  said  Land,"  &c.  At  another 
meeting,  held  Feb.  4,  1754,  the  following  action  was  taken  : 

After  some  coii.siderable  Discourse  about  the  old  corn  mill  that  was  Mr. 
Hopkins  the  Question  was  put  to  the  Town  wheither  they  were  Easie  with  Mr. 
Jonathan  Baldwins  tending  of  tlie  mill  It  appearing  to  theui  that  the  most  of  the 
customers  had  not  their  Corn  Ground  Well — Voted  that  they  were  uneasie  and  at 
the  same  meeting  made  Choise  of  Capt  Sam'.  Hickcox  Lieut  John  Scovill 
Liut  Tho*  porter  a  Committe  to  treat  with  Mr.  Jonathan  Baldwin  and  his  son 
Jonathan  and  Learn  what  agreement  they  can  come  to. 

Quite  recently,  since  the  grist  mill  was  discontinued,  and 
the  site  and  water  privilege  devoted  to  other  uses,  questions 
arose,  on  the  part  of  certain  persons,  as  to  the  conditions  at- 
tached to  the  old  mill  grants,  and  the  effect  which  a  neglect  of 
these  would  have  on  the  titles  of  the  present  owners.  Some 
came  to  the  conclusion,  after  searching  the  records,  that  the 
mill  grants  had  been  forfeited  and  that  the  lands  reverted 
back  to  the  grantors,  the  original  proprietors  of  the  town,  their 
heirs  and  assigns.     This   conclusion,  if  established,  would  put 

*  Land   Records,    Vol.  IV,  p.  13. 


84  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY. 

into  tlie  possession  of  the  latter  a  large  amount  of  property 
within  the  present  city  limits,  inchiding  mills,  factories,  water 
privileges  and  dwellings,  and  dispossessing  a  large  population 
of  their  estate.  As  the  inquiry  proceeded,  it  became  a  matter 
of  interest  to  know  what  the  mill  grants  were  and  what  lands 
were  included,  and  subjected  to  the  conditions. 
The  "  mill  lands,"  so  called,  were  the  following : 
1.  The  "  thirty  acresP  These  were  granted  by  the  com- 
mittee of  the  General  Court,  in  16Y9,  on  condition  that  the  mill 
be  maintained  forever,  as  we  have  seen.  It  does  not  appear 
that  this  land  was  "  located "  by  the  committee.  Doubtless, 
the  proprietors  and  the  miller  were  left  to  settle  among  them- 
selves the  location,  and  thus  accommodate  their  mutual  con- 
venience. Nor  is  there  anything  to  show  that  the  land  was 
taken  up,  or  at  any  rate,  surveyed,  immediately;  indeed  the 
contrary  appears  in  regard  to  a  part  of  it ;  for  on  the  eighteenth 
of  March,  1701-2,  Stephen  Upson  and  Benjamin  Barnes  with 
the  town  measurer  were  appointed  a  committee  "  to  lay  out  the 
mill  lot  at  the  mill,  and  what  highways  are  needful  for  the 
mill."  The  mill  lot  here  alluded  to  is,  probably,  the  one  re- 
ferred to  in  the  following  extracts : 

March  ye^=25=l'704  y«  town  granted  )«  too  acers  of  y*  mill  land  to  be  layd 
out  to  gether  betwein  ye  highway  y'  leads  to  y*  mill  and  y^  highway  y'  is 
next  to  abraham  andruss  sn'  lot  if  it  be  there  to  be  had  not  pregedising  y« 
highway  but  takeing  y'  highway  betwein  where  yong  abraham  set  up  a  hous  and  ' 
ye  riuer 

Oct.  26.  1713,  the  town  by  uot  agre  the  too  acrs  of  mill  land  laid  out  by  Leftcn- 
ant  Timothy  Standly  buting  on  the  mill  riuer  est  and  so  to  run  west  betwen  the 
hig  way  that  gose  from  the  town  to  the  mil  and  the  highway  that  gose  from  the 
town  to  the  mad  riuer  a  long  by  the  est  sid  of  Abraham  Andrus  hous  lot  it  buting 
also  west  on  a  high  way  that  gose  from  the  corner  of  Thomas  warners  to  said 
Andruss  is  acsepted  and  determined  to  be  and  remain  part  of  the  thirty  acurs  of 
land  intaile  by  the  grand  comity.     [Town  Book,  p.  117.] 

The  piece  of  land  above  is  recorded,  Dec.  1-tth,  1713, 
among  the  mill  lands,  by  John  Hopkins,  then  clerk,  as  "  two 
acres  on  Mad  River,  below  the  mill  dam,  south  on  highway, 
that  goes  to  said  river,  north  on  highway  that  goes  from  the 
town  to  the  mill,  west  on  highway."  It  seems  to  have  been 
the  land  immediately  below  the  old  mill  extending  down  the 
river  to  the  present  bridge  and  to  the  road  which  leads  to  it, 
reaching  west  to  Union  square  and  north  to  the  "mill  path," 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY.  85 

or  the  road  coming  from  the  town,  (Cole  street.)  In  tlie  sale, 
however,  to  Jonathan  Baldwin,  in  1732-3,  this  piece  is  called 
one  acre.  Perhaps  a  part  of  it  had  been  exchanged  for  other 
land. 

The  "  Mill  Plain"  lot  is  recorded  by  Jolm  Hopkins,  in  1713, 
and  described  as  "  within  the  common  fence  southward  from 
part  of  Abraham  Andruss,  his  house  lot,"  butted  north  on 
common  fence,  west  on  Dr.  Porter,  John  Richards,  Timothy 
Stanley  and  common  land,  south  on  highway,  east  on  Abra- 
ham Andruss  and  the  "  brow  of  the  hill." 

This  tract  of  land  lay  down  the  river  from  tlie  mill,  below 
the  bridge  and  south  of  Union  street.  Abraham  Andruss'  lot 
of  three  and  a  half  acres  lay  between  it  and  the  river  and  the 
road  going  to  the  river.  It  extended  south  as  far  as  Liberty 
street,*  or  some  other  east  and  west  road,  and  west  to  the  lands 
(»f  the  individuals  named.  It  appears  to  have  embraced  the 
entire  plain  at  the  north  end. 

The  "  eight  acre  lot "  before  alluded  to  as  removed,  by 
consent,  from  Pine  Hole,  was  situated  on  the  east  side  the 
Mad  River,  opjjosite  Mill  Plain,  lying  between  the  New 
Haven  road,  (as  it  was  then  called, — Balwin  street,  on  the 
map,)  the  common  fence  and  the  river.  It  appears,  however, 
not  to  have  extended  as  far  west  as  the  river,  but  to  have  been 
four  rods  from  it  at  the  nearest  point,  on  the  lower  side,  where 
it  met  the  common  fence.  It  is  described  on  the  same  page 
of  the  record  as  the  other  pieces  as  lying  "  over  Mill  River 
southward  from  the  town,  butted  west  on  common  fence, 
southerly  on  common  land,  easterly  and  westerly  on  highway." 

Another  piece  still,  of  two  acres,  lay  on  the  east  side  of  the 
river,  north  of  the  crossing,  "  over  against  the  mill." 

These  four  pieces,  containing  in  all  twenty-seven  acres,  are 
rec(M*ded  by  John  Hopkins,  for  the  first  time,  apparently,  in 
1713,  and  are  described  as  the  mill  lands,  belonging  to  the 
thirtv  acres.     The  remainino^  two  acres  are  not  recorded.    But 


*  Liberty  street  is  recorded  as  having  been  laid  out,  Sep.  23d,  1803,  through  Col.  Wm.  Leav- 
enworth's land,  called  the  Mill  Plain,  to  the  grist  mill  at  the  place  of  the  Hotchkiss  &  Merriman 
Manufacturing  Co.,  two  and  a  half  rods  wide  and  thirty-two  rods  in  length.  There  is  no  men- 
tion of  a  previous  road.  At  that  time,  the  high  level  ground,  down  as  far  as  the  bridge  on  the 
present  New  Haven  road,  was  called  Mill  Plain,  though  the  mill  land  could  not  have  extend- 
ed so  far  south  or  west. 


86  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 

in  the  conveyance  to  Jonathan  Baldwin,  two  other  pieces  are 
eininierated,  each  of  two  acres,  one  in  Isaac's  Meadow,  (at 
Isaac's  Meadow  bars,)  and  the  otlier  in  Hancox's  Meadow, 
while  the  two  acre  piece  "  below  the  mill  dam  "  is  called  one 
acre,  making  in  all  thirty  acres  cpiit  claimed  to  Baldwin. 

The  two  pieces  of  land  in  Isaac's  Meadow  and  in  Hancox's 
Meadow,  I  suppose  to  be  the  same  as  those  which  came  from 
Dea,  Lankton's  propriety,  and  which  were  at  first  "  entailed  to 
the  mill,"  and  then  (Sep.  1702)  the  "entailment  taken  off" 
by  the  town.  And  yet,  previous  to  Baldwin's  purchase,  the 
lot  in  Isaac's  Meadow  ("  easterly  on  the  brook  [Steel's]  west- 
erly on  the  hill")  had  been  called  three  acres,  instead  of  two, 
as  mentioned  in  the  deed  to  Baldwin.  Nor  do  I  know  why  the 
two  tracts  in  question  should  be  named  as  a  part  of  the  thirty 
acres.  The  act  of  1687  would  seem  to  imply  that  they  were 
distinct  from,  and  additional  to,  the  latter. 

'•I.  The  mill  ])lcice.  There  is  no  record  to  show  who  were  the 
grantors  of  the  mill  site  and  mill  privilege  ;  but  as  the  title, 
or  rather  the  right  to  grant,  was  in  the  connuittee  at  the  time 
the  mill  was  erected,  it  is  fair  to  conclude  that  they  Mere  the 
grantors.  Nor  does  it  appear  what  conditions,  if  any,  were 
originally  attached  to  the  grant.  The  action  of  the  town,  how- 
ever, in  1702,  taken  in  connection  with  the  agreement  signed 
by  Hopkins,  proves  that  there  were  conditions.  This  agree-, 
ment  between  the  parties,  it  will  be  remembered,  put  the  mill 
place  on  the  same  (or  similar)  footing  as  the  other  mill  lands. 
The  mill  place  was  "  to  remain  to  the  miller  and  his  heirs  for- 
ever, he  maintaining  a  mill  to  do  tlie  town's  work  forever  ; 
but  if  the  miller  fail  to  maintain  a  mill,  the  mill  place  to  re- 
turn to  the  town  and  privileges  of  it,  only  they  are  to  give  y* 
miller  a  reasonable  price  for  what  is  his  own  on  the  mill 
place."  It  is  not  clear  that  the  town  or  proprietors  had  any 
right,  either  inherent  or  conferred  by  the  town  patent,  to  change, 
or  consent  to  a  change,  of  the  conditions  of  an  original  grant  of 
the  committee  ;  but  perhaps  no  change  was  designed,  but  only 
a  declaration  of  what  was  the  original  intention.  It  will  be 
noticed  that  the  kind  of  mill  to  be  maintained,  whether  a  corn 
mill,  a  saw  mill,  or  a  rolling  mill  is  not  mentioned.  "  Town 
meeting"  and  "town"  are  employed,  according  to  the  custom 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBDKY.  87 

of  the  time,  for  proprietors' meeting  and  proprietors  of  the  town  ; 
but  these  mistakes,  in  common  with  others  of  the  same  sort, 
were  corrected  by  the  statute  of  1723. 

There  is  no  sufficient  evidence  to  show  that  the  conditions 
of  any  of  the  mill  grants,  even  those  attached  to  the  mill  place 
itself,  required  that  the  mill  should  be  maintained  where  it 
was  first  erected.  For  aught  that  appears,  Hopkins,  his  heirs 
and  assigns,  would  not  have  forfeited  the  grants,  had  he  or  they 
suffered  the  old  mill  to  go  to  decay,  and  erected  a  new  one 
somewhere  else,  up  or  down  the  river,  or  in  any  other  place 
not  inconveniently  remote,  running  it  by  such  power  as  was  at 
hand — water,  wind,  steam  or  horse  power.  K  any  one  of 
those  who  subsequently  held  a  part  of  the  entailed  property, 
however  small,  had  chosen  to  do  this,  the  old  mill  being  neg- 
lected, that  act,  it  appears  to  me,  would  have  fulfilled  the  con- 
ditions and  kept  alive  all  the  grants. 

The  question  has  been  asked — and  it  seemed  at  one  time 
to  be  a  question  of  some  importance — to  whom  would  the 
mill  lands  revert  in  case  of  a  forfeiture  ?  Undoubtedly,  to  the 
State,  unless  the  State  has  in  some  way  parted  with  its  rights. 
The  title  to  all  the  territory  of  the  colony  of  Connecticut,  at  the 
time  of  the  grants,  was  in  the  "Governor  and  Company,"  de- 
rived by  "  letters  patent"  from  the  king  of  England.  Tlie  com- 
mittee for  the  settlement  of  JMattatuck  represented  the  Gov- 
ernor and  Company — the  colonial  government — and  acted  by 
their  authority.  Grants,  conditions  and  reservations  made  by 
them,  who  were  mere  agents,  were  as  if  made  by  the  pi-inci- 
pal — the  government.  All  the  benefits  of  forfeiture,  there- 
fore, would  accrue  to  the  Colony  or  State. 

But  was  there  no  change  wrought  in  the  rights  of  the  gov- 
ernment by  the  town  patents,  or  acts  of  incorporation  ?  That 
of  16S6  may  be  equivocal  in  its  phraseology  ;  but  that  of  1720 
seems  to  me  clear  and  explicit.  The  latter  instrument  declares 
that  "we  the  Governor  and  Company  "  "  have  granted  remised, 
released  and  quit  claimed"  to  the  inhabitants,  proprietors  of 
Waterbury,  "all  the  abovesaid  tract  of  land,"  (having  de- 
scribed the  boundaries,)  "with  all  the  buildings,  fences,  woods, 
stones,"  &c.,  "  with  the  rights,  members,  appurtenances,  here- 
ditaments and  the  reversion  and  reversions,  remainder  and  re- 


88  HISTOKY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

mainders,  to  them  their  heirs  and  assigns  forever,  according  to 
their  several  grants,  proportions,  shares,  rights  and  interests 
in  of  and  nnto  tlie  lands  above  described,  to  be  distinguished  ac- 
cording to  their  several  descents,  devises,  grants,  divisions, 
agreements  and  purchases,  as  of  record  appeareth,  and  by  the 
records  of  said  town  of  Waterbury  may  be  seen,"  &c.,  tfcc. 

Thus,  it  seems  to  me  that  the  State  has  divested  itself  of  all 
its  rights,  reversionary  and  other,  in  the  lands  of  ancient 
Waterbury,  and  has  made  over  its  whole  title,  of  whatever 
kind,  to  the  proprietors.  All  original  grants,  therefore,  incum- 
bered Avith  conditions  which  have  been  disregarded,  till  a  for- 
feiture has  been  wrought,  would  seem  to  be  the  property  of 
the  proprietors.  This  is  the  apparent  condition  of  the  mill 
lands.  Before  the  "  mill  place  and  privileges "  however,  can 
go  into  new  hands,  their  present  owners  must  be  paid  a 
"reasonable  price  for  what  is  their  own  on  the  place,"  according 
to  the  agreement  of  1702,  and  if  the  parties  cannot  "  agree 
[the  property  is]  to  be  appraised  by  inditferent  men." 

Such  are  the  views  of  the  writer,  but  as  he  is  no  lawyer  and 
no  expert  in  such  matters,  he  may  labor  under  some  funda- 
mental error. 

I  have  said  that  cpiestions  arose  as  to  the  efiect  which  a 
discontinuance  of  the  mill  must  have  on  the  old  mill  grants. 
Several  meetings  were  held  in  1849  and  1850,  and  committees 
appointed,  at  different  times,  to  investigate  the  subject.  April 
2d,  1850,  Edmund  E.  Davis,  Isaiah  Dunbar,  David  Chatfield 
and  Josiah  Culver  were  chosen  "a  committee  to  examine  into 
the  right  the  proprietors  have  to  Scovill's  mill  seat  which  was 
formerly  granted  to  Stephen  Hopkins."  These  meetings,  how- 
ever, and  some  subsequent  ones,  seem  to  have  been  informal ; 
when  some  of  those  opposed  to  the  fartlier  agitation  of  the  sub- 
ject thought  it  worth  while  to  move.  A  special  meeting, 
purporting  to  be  legally  warned,  was  held  Jan.  4th,  1851, 
when  it  was  voted  "  to  bargain,  sell  and  convey  all  the  right, 
title  and  interest  that  the  proprietors  of  the  ancient  town  of 
Waterbury  have  to  any  of  the  undivided  lands  holden  or  pos- 
sessed by  individuals  given  or  granted  on  condition,"  &c. 
Samuel  11.  Nettleton,  Silas  Hoadley  and  Josiah  Hine  were 
chosen  a  committee  "  to  release  and  convey,"  <Szc. 


IIISTOEY    OF    WATEKBURY.  89 

At  ail  adjourned  meeting  held  the  25th  day  of  Januaiy, 
1S51,  the  committee  appointed  at  the  last  meeting  made  a  re- 
port, the  result  of  their  investigations.  They  recapitulate 
some  of  the  facts  which  have  already  been  mentioned  con- 
cerning the  old  mill  grants,  at  the  same  time  overlooking 
others  of  material  importance.     They  then  go  on  to  say  : 

And  we  further  find  that  from  that  date  said  lands  have  been  regularlailv  con- 
veyed from  one  person  to  another  down  to  the  present  occupants,  some  by  deeds 
of  quit  chiim  and  some  by  deeds  of  warranty,  without  any  reservations  in  the  same 
and  warranting  against  all  claims  whatsoever  and  free  from  all  conditions,  and 
that  iu  some  of  the  deeds  of  the  mill  lands  as  then  called,  the  mill  and  privilege 
are  named  as  a  separate  part  of  the  property  and  distinct  from  the  same. 

And  we  further  find  that  from  the  long  lapse  of  time  and  the  course  of  con- 
veyances of  said  property  and  the  impossibility  of  now  determining  the  precise 
location  of  the  said  lands — we  recommend  that  the  subject  is  not  deserving  of  fur- 
ther attention,  and  for  the  purpose  of  quieting  all  further  agitation  on  the  subject — 
we  recommend  the  appointment  of  a  committee  of  two,  in  lieu  of  the  one  appoint- 
ed at  the  last  meeting,  to  release  to  any  of  the  present  owners  of  said  property 
or  [of]  any  other  property,  any  rights  that  the  ancient  proprietors  may  have  to 
lands  heretofore  granted  upon  condition  as  aforesaid — 

"We  also  find  that  the  grant  of  said  lands  was  from  the  State  [Colony]  of  Connec- 
ticut instead  of  the  ancient  proprietors,  and  if  there  is  any  reversionary  interest  as 
to  said  lands,  the  title  is  iu  the  State  of  Connecticut  instead  of  the  ancient  propri- 
etors of  Waterbury. 

This  report  was  accepted  by  a  vote  of  twenty-one  to  ten. 
In  the  affirmative  were  Daniel  Upson,  Thomas  Welton,  Wil- 
liam II.  Scovill,  James  M.  L.  Scovill,E.  F.  Merrill,  Aaron  Ben- 
edict, John  Thomson,  John  S.  Kingsbury,  Garry  Merrill,  S. 
W.  Hall,  William  Ilickox,  John  Buckingham,  S.  M.  Bucking- 
ham, Edward  S.  Clark,  Charles  D.  Kingsbury,  Miles  Newton, 
Willard  Spencer,  Eldad  Bradley,  Anson  Bronson,  P.  W.  Car- 
ter, Sherman  Ilickox. 

In  the  negative  were  Isaiah  Dunbar,  George  N.  Pritchard, 
Horace  Foot,  David  Chatfield,  Thomas  B.  Davis,  Alonzo  Allen, 
David  C.  Adams,  Enos  Chatlield,  Josiah  Culver,  David  M. 
Pritchard. 

In  pursuance  of  the  recommendation  of  the  report,  a  com- 
mittee, consisting  of  Willard  Spencer  and  John  P.  Elton,  M-ere 
appointed  "for,  and  in  the  name  and  behalf  of  the  proprietors 
of  the  common  and  undivided  lands  of  the  ancient  town  of 
Waterbury,  to  release  and  convey  by  proper  deeds  of  convey- 
ance to  the  present  owner  or  owners  of  any  lands  known  as 


90  HISTORY    OF    WATEKBURY. 

the  mill  lands  and  all  others  heretofore  given  or  granted  on 
conditions  by  a  committee  appointed  by  the  State  [Colony]  of 
Connecticut,  or  by  any  subsequent  committee  or  committees 
of  the  ancient  town  [or  proprietors?]  of  Waterbury  all  the 
rights,  titles  and  interests  that  the  said  proprietors  may  or 
ought  to  have  thereto,  also  to  release  and  discharge  said 
lands  from  said  conditions." 

This  is  the  important  vote.  The  record  says  it  passed,  but 
the  number  of  voters  or  votes,  (or  the  names  of  those  who 
voted,)  is  not  given.  It  does  not  appear  whether  all  the  per- 
sons whose  names  appear  in  the  first  vote,  and  who  may  have 
been  in  the  last,  were  proprietors.  It  does  not  appear  that  the 
votes  were  counted  according  to  each  man's  projiriety,  or  in- 
terest in  the  common  lands,  as  the  old  statute  directed,  and 
as  was  the  ancient  custom.  Nor  does  it  appear  that  those 
deriving  their  rights  from  bachelor  proprietors,  who  (by  the  ex- 
press terms  of  the  grant  which  made  them  such,  were  denied 
a  voice  in  "  giving  away  lands  ")  were  excluded  from  the  vote. 
But  the  question  on  the  acceptance  of  the  report  was  not  a 
material  one. 

It  is  clear  that  the  proprietors  have  no  power  to  "  release 
and  discharge  lands  "  from  conditions  that  were  imposed  by 
the  Colony  or  its  committee ;  though  they  may  undoubtedly 
"  release  and  convey,"  or  quit  claim,  lands  to  which  they  have 
acquired  a  title  in  consequence  of  a  forfeiture  of,  or  a  non 
compliance  with,  the  conditions  imposed  by  said  Colony  or 
committee. 

The  minority  of  course  were  not  pleased  with  the  course 
which  had  been  pursued  at  this  meeting,  and  particularly  with 
the  powers  given  to  the  "  deeding  committee."  They  ques- 
tioned the  rights  of  certain  persons  who  had  been  permitted 
to  act  and  vote,  and  disputed  the  legality  of  the  whole  pro- 
ceeding, 6zc. 

Grist  mills  in  a  new  settlement  are  soon  followed  by  saw 
mills.  1  am  unable  to  say  when  or  Mdiere  the  first  saw  mill 
in  Waterbury  was  erected.  Tliere  was  one  existing  in  1686, 
for  the  "  path  that  leads  to  the  saw  mill  "  is  spoken  of  Jan.  3d, 
1686,  (1686-Y.)  I  suspect,  but  I  do  not  certainly  know,  that 
the  mill  thus  referred  to  stood  where  the  Waterbury  Knitting 


HISTORY    OF    WATEEBUEY.  91 

Company  now  cany  on  business,  where  one  was  in  being  at 
the  time  the  factory  was  erected,  and  where  tlie  writer,  in 
early  life,  sawed  logs.  I  find  as  early  as  1704,  that  a  lot,  at 
this  point,  of  four  acres,  owned  by  Jeremiah  and  Joshua  Peck, 
and  fronting  on  Cheriy  street,  (now  so  called,)  was  bounded 
west  on  a  "  passage,"  which  I  suppose  to  have  been  the  same  as 
that  which  still  exists,  coming  down  from  the  north,  along 
which  logs  were  drawn  to  the  mill.  This  lot  was  called  in 
1746,  "  Lieut.  Bronson's  saw  mill  lot."  Whether  this  mill  Avas 
referred  to  in  the  following  grant,  April  6tli,  1702,  I  am  unable 
with  certainty  to  say. 

Stephen  Upson  had  a  grant  of  land  between  Bronson's  path  that  goes  to  his 
boggy  meadow  and  the  path  that  goes  over  the  meadow  to  the  saw  mill. 

A  meadow  called  "  Bronson's  Meadow,  in  1724,  was  on  the 
east  side  of  the  brook,  in  the  neighborhood  of  the  supposed 
saw  mill. 

There  was  a  saw  mill  on  Mad  River,  near  the  Farmington 
road,  which  is  referred  to  March  28,  1695,  whicli  I  suppose 
not  to  be  the  same  as  that  alluded  to  in  1686,  or  in  1702. 

After  grist  mills  and  saw  mills  have  been  provided  for  a 
new  township,  y^wZZin^  mills  are  thought  of  for  the  purpose  of 
fulling  and  dressing  cloth  for  wearing  apparel.  Cloth  is  more 
easily  transported  to  distant  mills  than  grain  or  logs  ;  still,  as 
the  farmers  of  new  countries  expect  to  pay  for  what  they  buy 
by  the  products  of  their  farms,  which  are,  for  the  most  part, 
too  heavy  for  convenient  transport,  it  is  very  desirable  to  have 
mills  for  this  as  well  as  for  other  machine-work,  near  at  hand. 
The  people  of  Waterbury  gave  this  matter  their  early  consid- 
eration. 

[Jan  20,  1692.]  Thare  was  sequesterd  the  great  brook  from  edmun  scots  lot 
down  to  samuell  hickox  jr  lot  for  to  build  a  fulling  mill. 

It  was  thus  sequestered,  or  set  apart,  that  it  might  not  be 
taken  up  by  those  in  search  of  desirable  places  where  they 
might  "  locate  "  their  grants  or  divisions,  thus  becoming  indi- 
vidual property.  The  design  was  to  reserve  it  to  be  given,  or 
disposed  of,  to  some  person  who  would  erect  and  maintain  a 
fulling  mill.  "Whether  the  portion  of  the  brook  thus  set  apart 
■was  above  or  below  the  Knitting  Company's  factory,  I  cannot 


92  HISTORY    OF    WATERBUEY. 

say,  I  am  not  aware  that  a  fulling  mill  existed  upon  tins 
stream  early,  though  there  may  have  been  one.  The  earliest 
mention  of  such  a  mill  on  Great  Brook  which  I  have  met  with 
is  in  April,  1737,  when  Nathan  Prindle  sold  to  I^athaniel  Ar- 
nold a  fulling  mill,  which  stood  on  the  Buck's  Hill  road  near 
the  site  of  tlie  old  Clock  Factory  of  the  late  Mark  Leaven- 
w^orth,  (Waterbury  Knitting  Co.,  on  the  map.)  The  mill  then 
standing  must  have  been  built  between  1728  and  1732. 

The  tirst  fulling  mill  known  to  have  been  built  in  Water- 
bury,  was  on  Fulling  Mill  Brook,  at  Judd's  Meadow,  now 
Naugatuck.  I  suppose  this  mill,  then  about  to  be  built,  is 
referred  to  in  the  following  passage,  and  that  Daniel  Warner's 
Brook  is  the  same  as  that  which  was  afterwards  called  Fulling 
Mill  Brook,  the  mill  giving  its  name  to  the  stream. 

March  G"*,  1709-10,  the  proprietors  granted  to  Samuel  Hickox  the  Liberty  of 
that  Stream  called  daniel  Worner's  Brook  from  the  East  side  of  the  going  over 
the  s<i  Brook.  Any  place  for  Conveniancy  of  Daming  So  Long  as  he  Shall  main- 
tain A  fulling  mill  and  Conveniency  of  Land  to  pass  and  dry  Cloth. 

Samuel  Hickox,  2d,  died  June  3d,  1713,  and  after  his  death, 
one  of  his  sons  is  spoken  of  as  having  had  land  laid  out 
"  where  his  father  built  a  fulling  mill."  Samuel  Hickox,  then, 
had  a  mill,  wdiich  was  erected  before  1713,  and  probably  after 
1709,  on  the  brook  where  he  lived,  called  Fulling  Mill  Brook, 
Dr.  Trumbull,  in  his  History  of  Connecticut,  remarks  that 
there  was  but  one  clothier  in  the  Colony,  in  1713.  In  refer- 
ence to  this  statement,  Mr.  Cothren,  in  his  History  of  Ancient 
Woodbury,  (Yol.  I,  p.  73,)  remarks,  that  "  if  the  assertion  is 
true,  wliich  he  has  no  reason  to  doubt,  Woodbur}^  was  the 
location  of  the  first  clothier,"  Abraham  Fulford  having  es- 
tablished himself  there  and  built  a  fulling  mill  previous  to 
tliat  time.  Dr.  Trumbull,  who  quotes  as  his  authority,  "  An- 
swers to  questions  from  the  Lords  of  Trade  and  Plantations, 
1710,"  was  doubtless  mistaken.  In  all  probability,  there  were 
many  clothiers  and  fulling  mills  in  the  Colony  at  the  period 
named. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUEY.  U3 


CIIAPTEE    YIIL 


ROADS,  BRIDGES,  &c. 

All  new  settlements  suffer  much  inconvenience  and  priva- 
tion for  want  of  roads.  To  make  good,  or  even  passable 
roads,  requires  mucli  time,  labor  and  expense — sacrifices  that 
new  settlers  can  ill  afford.  And  yet,  civilization  cannot  go 
on — cannot  even  be  preserved — without  them.  Of  course, 
men  will  first  build  those  roads  which  are  most  needed  — 
which  best  serve  to  connect  them  with  the  world  which  they 
have  left — with  its  people,  its  institutions,  its  machinery  and 
its  markets. 

The  first  planters  of  Mattatuck  found  it  convenient  and 
necessary  to  keep  a  constant  communication  with  Farming- 
ton.  The  Farmington  road  was  the  first  that  was  opened.  It 
was  doubtless,  for  a  time,  a  mere  horse  path,  and  was  in  a 
very  imperfect  state  for  many  years.  In  its  general  course, 
it  ran  nearly  east  from  the  village,  along  just  north  of  Specta- 
cle Pond,  (at  the  junction  of  the  new  plank  road  and  the  old 
Cheshire  road.)  It  crossed  Beaver  Pond  (Hog  Pound)  Brook 
a  little  distance  from  its  mouth,  j^assed  north  of  Beaver  Pond 
through  East  Farms,  occupying  a  position  near  the  present 
road.  At  the  east  end  it  came  out  just  at  the  boundary  line 
between  Farmington  and  Wallingford,  (now  AVolcott  and 
Cheshire.)  There  is  no  early  survey  of  it  on  record.  Our 
whole  knowledge  respecting  it  is  gathered  from  land  surveys, 
votes,  &c,,  in  which  it  is  incidentally  mentioned.  Though  a 
vote  was  passed  in  1Y02,  ordering  that  all  surveys  of  high- 
ways sliould  be  recorded,  this  was  not  done  till  1716  and  af- 
terwards. 

In  May,  1731,  an  "upper  road  to  Farmington"  was  in  ex- 
istence, in  the  northeast  corner  of  the  town,  at  a  place  called 
Poland,  Lands  at  Ash  Swamp  were  situated  on  this  road.  It 
was  probably  a  continuation  of  the  Bucks  Hill  road. 


94:  IIISTOKY    OF    WATERBURY. 

There  is  a  record  of  a  survey  of  a  liigliway  "  from  Farming- 
ton  bounds  to  the  town,"  bearing  date  Feb.  9th,  1754,  which 
seems  to  be  the  old  road  which  has  been  described,  though 
this  fact  is  not  aUuded  to.  It  "  began  at  Farmington  south- 
west corner,"  and  terminated  in  the  village  at  Ebenezer 
Bronson's  and  John  Scovill's  corners,  butting,  as  it  passed 
tlirough  the  town,  "  on  each  side  on  y«  ends  of  each  man's 
home  lot  as  it  is  now  fenced,  the  boundaries  of  said  highway 
being  set  at  y^  corner  of  each  man's  lot,"  Distances  are  men- 
tioned in  this  survey,  and  the  general  direction,  but  not  the 
points  of  the  compass. 

In  1686,  New  Haven  and  Mattatuck  were  ordered  by  the 
General  Court  to  make  a  road  between  the  two  places  as 
speedily  as  the  work  could  be  conveniently  done.  It  was  soon 
after  alluded  to  on  the  town  record  as  "  our  road  that  leads  to 
New  Haven,"  and  land  was  laid  out  on  it,  at  Judd's  Meadow, 
in  Jan.  1690-1.  It  was  the  second  road  connecting  Water- 
bury  with  the  other  settlements.  Its  commencement  was  at 
Mill  River.  It  ran  in  the  direction  of  Baldwin  street,  continu- 
ing along  upon  the  high  ground  on  the  east  side  of  Naugatuck 
Biver,  and  some  distance  from  it,  passing  a  little  east  of  the 
old  burying  yard  at  Judd's  Meadow.  It  was  used  as  the  road 
to  Judd's  Meadow  till  1721,  (when  a  highw^ay  on  tlie  west  side 
of  the  river  was  built,)  and  as  the  road  to  New  Haven  till  the, 
present  turnpike  w^as  constructed,  about  1802. 

In  June,  1716,  there  was  a  survey  of  the  "  country  road"  to 
New  Haven  by  Serg.  Stephen  Upson  and  Abram  Andruss, 
which  is  recorded.  It  began  "  at  the  paith  that  goetli  over 
the  river  a  letel  westward  of  the  mill,"  "  at  the  mouth  of  the 
mill  treanch,"  and  ended  at  the  New  Haven  bounds.  The 
road  ran  apparently  where  the  old  one  did.  The  survey  of  the 
New  Haven  road  is  the  first  which  is  recorded.  Distances 
and  points  of  compass  are  not  mentioned,  and  little  can  now 
be  learned  from  it. 

The  third  road  running  out  of  Waterbury,  chronologically 
speaking,  was  the  Woodbury  road.  It  is  mentioned  inciden- 
tally as  early  as  1687,  though  it  could  not  have  been  much 
used  at  that  time.  After  the  breaking  out  of  the  French  and 
Indian  wars,  which  followed  the  English  Bevolution,  this  be- 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY.  95 

came  a  more  important  and  more  frequently  traveled  road. 
It  connected  Woodbury  with  Hartford  and  the  river  towns. 
It  was  made  use  of,  it  is  believed,  to  communicate  with  Al- 
bany and  the  military  posts  lying  north  of  that  place.  The 
Waterbury  people,  in  their  petition  to  the  General  Court  for 
assistance  in  building  their  new  meeting  house  in  1691,  while 
enumerating  their  burdens,  speak  of  the  trouble  and  expense 
of  "  the  soldiers  passing  to  and  fro  and  their  often  entertain- 
ments." After  Mr,  Peck  was  disabled  by  illness,  the  inhab- 
itants of  Waterbury  went  by  this  road  to  Woodbury  to  ob- 
tain baptism  for  their  children.  It  passed  up  the  West  Side 
hill  nearly  where  the  present  road  runs  across  Breakneck 
Hill,  north  of  the  pond,  in  Middlebury. 

In  June,  1720,  Isaac  Bronson,  Timothy  Standly  and  Thomas 
Judd  laid  out  a  "  rode  towards  Woodbury,"  commencing  at 
'*  tlie  weste  bars,"  being  twenty  rods  wide  for  a  distance  up  the 
hill,  running  by  Isaac  Bronson's  farm  (at  Breakneck)  and 
ending  "  at  the  going  down  of  Wolfpit  Hill  to  the  Bridg 
Brook  at  Woodbury  bounds."  At  what  points  this  road  de- 
viated from  the  old  one,  I  am  unable  to  say.  "  The  old  path  " 
is  referred  to  in  only  one  instance. 

In  Dec.  1766,  there  was  a  resurvey  of  the  Woodbury  j-oad, 
commencing  at  Obadiah  Scovill's  (now  Mrs.  Bennet  Bronson's) 
corner,  (being  four  rods  and  eleven  feet  from  Andrew  Bron- 
son's corner  opposite,)  and  running  one  hundred  and  seventy- 
six  rods  to  the  bridge,  the  highway  being  three  rods  wide. 
On  the  other  side  of  the  river,  the  road  Avas  eleven  rods  wide, 
and  on  the  hill,  twenty  rods  Avide.  The  old  river  crossing  was 
some  ten  rods  below  the  present  bridge. 

The  road  to  Bucks  Hill  was  next  in  order.  Feb  25th,  1702- 
3,  "  Sergt.  Bronson  and  Ens.  Stanley  were  appointed  a  com- 
mittee to  lay  out  a  highway  from  y®  highway  at  y*  town  to 
Bucks  Hill  and  a  passage  from  Bucks  Hill  to  y' common  fenc  at 
Hancox  Meadow  and  one  to  Ash  Swamp."  Another  committee, 
consisting  of  Doct.  Warner  and  Richard  Wilton,  were  chosen 
to  lay  out  a  road  to  Bucks  Hill,  in  1715.  But  there  is  no  rec- 
ord of  a  survey  at  either  of  these  times;  but  in  1724,  Ephraim 
Warner  and  John  Bronson  "  laid  out  a  highway  to  Bucks  Hill, 
beginning  at  the  Claypits,  [west  corner  of  jS'orth  Main  and 


96  IIISTOKY    OF    WATERBURY. 

Grove,]  six  rods  wide  where  the  path  now  is,"  and  running  to 
Edmund  Scott's  pasture,  then  twenty  rods  wide  to  Obadiah 
Scott's  house,  thence  in  the  path  to  the  east  end  of  Bucks  Hill 
to  Richard  AVelton's  house,  thence  northward  in  a  path  to 
Hancox  Brook  Meadow. 

The  following  town  vote  relates  to  the  continuation  of  Wil- 
low street,  up  the  hill  north  of  Mrs.  Bennet  Bronson's  dwelling. 
It  is  the  earliest  formal  record  concerning  a  highway  out- 
side of  the  original  town  plot. 

Oct.  26.  1713,  at  atown  meting  the  town  determin  that  the  highway  to  run 
northward  by  the  common  fens  from  John  scouils  on  the  est  sid  of  the  fens  shal  be 
the  sam  breth  [breadth]  as  tis  a  gainst  said  scouils  lot  till  it  coms  to  the  extent 
of  said  scouils  land  estward  from  the  fens. 

A  highway  towards  Westbury  through  the  common  field 
was  laid  out  by  Nathaniel  Arnold  and  Thomas  Barnes,  in 
Nov.  1729.  It  began  "  at  the  road  on  the  hill  against  Manhan 
Meadow,"  (where  the  house  marked  Timothy  Church  stands,) 
and  "  continued  twenty  foot  wide  as  the  path  now  goes  "  to  the 
upper  end  of  Manhan  Meadow.*  It  then  crossed  the  river  and 
bore  westward  and  northward  across  Steel's  Meadow  to  Steel's 
Plain  east  of  J.  G.  Bronson's  house.  This  road  was  subse- 
quently changed  at  its  commencement  near  the  village,  so  as 
to  begin  at  "  the  country  road  that  goeth  to  Woodbury  before 
we  come  to  Manhan  Meadow  Ilill,"  crossing  the  plain  and  a 
small  brook,  and  continuing  on  the  hill  side,  near  where  the 
present  road  runs.  At  the  other  end,  or  Steel's  Plain,  it  was 
continued  west  and  north,  at  the  foot  of  the  hill  up  Steel's 
Brook  and  on  the  west  side,  and  so  on  to  Scott  mill,  Wooster 
Swamp  and  the  village,  in  the  northern  and  northwestern  part 
of  Westbury. 

That  part  of  the  present  Watertown  road  which  is  next  to 
the  covered  bridge  was  not  laid  out  till  November,  1753. 
It  began  three  rods  from  the  top  of  the  river  bank,  and  ran 

*  In  Eliot's  Indian  Bible,  Munhan,  Manhan,  Munnahan  Mannahan,  &c.,  are  the  Indian 
words  for  an  island.  Manhattan,  the  Indian  name  of  New  York  Island,  is  doubtless  the 
same  word  in  another  dialect.  There  are  indications,  (or  used  to  be,)  that  Manhan  Meadow 
was  once  an  island,  and  that  a  part  of  the  river,  at  no  very  distant  period,  ran  down  upon  the 
east  side  next  the  hill  in  the  course  of  the  canal  of  the  Water  Power  Co.,  and  so  continuing 
through  the  old  Long  Cove  and  along  the  line  of  the  Naugatuck  railroad  till  it  met  the  Great 
Brook.  This  was  low  ground,  and  throughout  its  extent  there  was,  in  the  writer's  memory, 
a  chain  of  miniature  lakes  or  ponds. 


c^.^^  <-.;^72^'%^^^^^z_ 


HISTORY    OF    WATEEBURT.  97 

"  northward  forty  four  rods  to  a  lieep  of  stones  three  rods  from 
tlie  bank  on  the  west  side  of  Bronson's  Island."  It  tlien  ran  a 
little  more  eastward  nine  rods  to  an  apple  tree  three  rods  from 
the  river  bank  ;  then  northward  one  hundred  and  thirteen 
rods  to  a  rock  three  rods  from  the  top  of  the  river  bank,  bound- 
ing east  on  said  bank  ;  then  a  little  west  of  north  twenty  rods; 
then  "  northward,"  in  all,  one  hundred  and  ninety-four  rods, 
terminating  at  a  heap  of  stones  "  between  Joseph  Bronson's 
and  01)adiah  Richards"  at  "the  passage  that  conies  from 
Tompkins  to  Isaac's  Meadow." 

From  the  description  of  this  road,  it  would  seem  that  the 
river  above  the  bridge  (or  a  branch  of  it)  at  the  date  mention- 
ed, ran  down  across  the  meadow  three  rods  from  the  higliway. 
The  road  was  designed  to  give  the  Westbury  people  and  those 
living  north  up  the  river,  access  to  the  lower  bridge. 

In  Dec.  1721,  there  was  a  higliway  laid  out  to  Judd's 
Meadow,*  on  the  west  side  of  the  river.  It  began  at  Long 
Meadow  bars  and  passed  down  the  river  a  distance,  then  over 
the  hill  and  across  Hop  Brook,  and  ended  at  Joseph  Lewis' 
home  lot. 

To  reach  this  road,  people  went  in  at  the  south  meadow 
gate,  followed  the  course  of  the  present  turnpike  to  the  lower 
end  of  Mad  Meadow,  and  crossed  the  Naugatuck  River  at  the 
"Long  Meadow  riding  place,"  at  the  foot  of  Benedict  and 
Burnham  Manufacturing  Go's  race  way. 

The  river  road  to  Plymouth  (now  called)  did  not  exist  at  an 
early  period.  There  was  one,  however,  laid  out  on  the  west 
side  December,  1735,  from  Steel's  Plain  northward  to  Buck's 
Meadow  Mountain,  for  the  accommodation  of  the  inhabitants 
living  in  that  direction.  On  the  east  side  of  the  JS^augatuck, 
tliere  was  the  pent  road  to  the  upper  end  of  Manhan  Meadow. 
From  this  point,  it  was  extended  (at  a  very  early  date,  doubt- 
less) to  Ilancox  Meadow,  for  the  accommodation  of  the  farm- 
ers. There  was  a  passage  above  for  those  living  upon  the 
river,  north  ;  for  in  1738,  it  was  stated  by  the  people  of  North- 


*  March  26th,  1699.  "  Abraham  Andruss,  Sen.,  John  Warner,  Sen.,  and  John  Hopkins  were 
chosen  a  committee  to  lay  out  a  passage  to  Judd's  Meadow." 

Where  it  was  proposed  that  this  passage  should  be,  or  whether  the  committee  did  anything  on 
the  subject,  does  not  appear. 


98  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUEY. 

bmy,  in  their  petition  to  the  Assembly  for  "  winter  privileges," 
that  to  get  to  meeting  at  the  center,  they  were  obliged  to  cross 
the  river  nine  times,  and  to  pass  through  ten  gates  and  sets  of 
bars.*  In  October,  1745,  a  regular  highway  was  laid  out 
from  the  mouth  of  Spruce  Brook,  south,  on  the  river  bank, 
twelve  rods  wide,  to  Hancox  Meadow.  In  December,  1772, 
a  committee  was  appointed  ''  to  go  and  view  a  proposed  pent 
road  the  east  side  of  the  river  through  Hancox  Meadow  to 
Northbury  and  make  report." 

The  present  turnpike  road  from  Plymouth  to  Salem  (Naug- 
atuck)  bridge,  there  to  unite  with  the  Strait's  turnpike  con- 
necting New  Haven  with  Litchfield  by  Watertown,  was  fin- 
ished in  1702.  It  was  an  open  highway  and  a  great  under- 
taking. 

I  suppose  that  the  first  bridge  over  the  ISTaugatuck  Eiver 
was  built  on  the-  Woodbury  road,  in  1736,  probably  a  little 
below  where  the  present  bridge  stands,  in  accordance  with  a 
town  vote  passed  in  1735.  In  Dec.  1736,  there  was  a  tax  laid 
"  of  three  pence  on  the  pound  to  pay  the  charges  of  the  bridge 
and  other  town  charges."  These  are  the  first  notices  of  a 
In'idge  to  be  found  on  record.  In  a  petition  to  the  General 
Court  for  "  winter  privileges,"  in  October,  1732,  the  West- 
bury  people  mentioned  as  one  of  the  reasons  why  their  prayer 
should  be  granted,  that  they  were  separated  from  the  meeting 
house  by  "a  great  river  which  is  called  Waterbury  Eiver, 
which  for  great  part  of  the  winter  and  spring  is  not  passable." 
It  is  fair  therefore  to  conclude  that  no  bridge  was  in  existence 
in  1732,  and  that  the  notices  which  have  been  referred  to  in 
1735  and  1736,  relate  to  the  first  bridge. 

In  the  spring  of  1740-41,  the  bridge  was  carried  away  or 
much  damaged  by  a  flood.  A  vote  was  passed  to  "  repair  " 
it,  and  Lieut.  Thomas  Bronson  and  others  were  ai)j)ointed  a 
committee  "  to  look  after  and  save  what  timber  can  be 
found."  In  the  fall,  however,  the  bridge  had  been  again 
swept  away,  and  a  committee  was  chosen  to  rebuild  it,  and  to 


*  A  letter  before  me  from  Mr.  Noah  M.  Bronson  of  Medina,  Ohio,  dated  July,  1S55,  when 
the  writer  was  eighty-eight  years  of  age,  states  that  in  passing  down  the  river  from  Jerico  to 
Waterbury  village,  with  a  team,  after  the  Revolution,  one  was  obliged  to  cross  the  stream  six 
times,  and  remove  from  twenty-five  to  thirty  sets  of  bars. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  99 

"take  advice  in  what  form  or  manner"  to  construct  it.  They 
were  to  have  "a  discretionary  power  whether  to  hire  it  done 
by  the  grate  or  otherwise."  In  order  to  defray  a  part  of  the 
expenses,  it  was  decided,  in  February,  1743-4,  to  ask  tlie 
General  Assembly  to  make  "  the  bridge  built  over  the  Nauga- 
tuck  River  in  the  country  road  to  Woodbury  a  toll  bridge." 

In  Februar}',  1748-9,  it  was  necessary  again  to  rebuild  the 
bridge  on  the  AVoodbury  road,  "  the  timber  and  plank  of  the 
old  bridge  "  to  be  used.  £80  were  appropriated  for  this  pur- 
pose. In  1758,  a  bridge  was  built  by  Isaac  Bronson  and 
George  Xichols.  Five  pounds  M'ere  voted  them  the  next  year. 
In  September,  1761,  they  petitioned  the  town  for  thirty  pounds, 
saying  the  whole  cost  of  the  bridge  had  been  about  sixty-five 
pounds  lawful  money,^  and  that  it  was  hard  for  them  to  bear 
the  whole  charge.  It  had  not  been  made  a  public  bridge  at 
this  time. 

In  December,  1745,  Capt.  Samuel  Hickox  requested  the 
town  to  assist  him  to  erect  a  bridge  over  the  river  at  the  up- 
per end  of  Ilaiicox  Meadow,  (where  he  had  a  mill.)  "  They 
allowed  him  to  call  out  Waterbury  men  and  Bucks'  Hill  men 
and  those  of  the  old  society,  excluding  Judd's  Meadow  men, 
that  are  obliged  to  work  in  the  highway,  one  day,  provided 
he  allow  a  pent  road  through  his  fields  and  maintain  gates  and 
furnish  a  good  cart  bridge." 

In  January,  1748-9,  twenty-tAvo  pounds  were  granted  to 
Capt.  Hickox  towards  "  a  good  cart  bridge  at  his  mill,"  a 
flood  having  swept  away  the  old  one.  Abraham  Hickox  and 
John  Hickox,  (sons  of  Capt.  Samuel,)  received  from  the  town, 
March,  1704,  "  three  pounds  as  a  donation,"  for  the  cart  bridge 
which  they  had  built  over  the  "  Great  River,"  at  the  same 
place,  the  other  having  apparently  shared  the  fate  of  the  first. 
Twelve  pounds,  in  provision,  were  appropriated,  in  February, 
1767,  for  still  another  bridge  at  Hancox  Meadow. 

A  cart  bridge  in  Northbury  was  about  being  built  in  1747, 
and  £22  money,  old  tenor,  were  voted  Dec.  8th,  of  that  year, 
to  be  paid  when  the  bridge  was  completed.     It  was  situated. 


*  The  reader  will  understand  that  £1  old  Connecticut  currency  was  the  equivalent  of  $3.33 1-3 
U.  S.  currency. 


100  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY. 

according  to  tlie  record,  "  where  the  highway  is  laid  to  the 
river,  east  from  Mr.  John  How's  house."  Five  pounds  were 
granted  in  February,  1759,  to  the  society  of  Northbury  for 
their  encouragement  in  constructing  a  cart  bridge  over  the 
river  at  that  place.  Probably  the  old  bridge  had  been  de- 
stroyed by  a  freshet,  and  the  balance  of  tlie  cost  of  replacing 
it  was  borne  by  individuals. 

In  1761,  eleven  petitioners  applied  to  the  General  Court  for 
relief,  saying  that  they  had  built  a  bridge  over  the  river  near 
the  center  of  l^orthbury,  at  an  expense  of  £70,  and  that  the 
town  refused  to  pay  for  it.  The  town  was  ordered  to  pay  £30 
and  keep  the  bridge  in  repair. 

In  January,  1748-9,  a  grant  of  twentj^-two  pounds  money, 
old  tenor,  was  made,  for  the  first  time,  apparently,  for  con- 
structing a  bridge  over  the  Mad  River,  a  little  below  Mr.  Jon- 
athan Baldwin's  mill,  on  the  road  to  Judd's  Meadow. 

On  the  report  of  a  committee,  March  5th,  1753,  the  town 
"voted  that  Judd's  Meadow  men  should  draw  one  hundred 
pounds  money,  old  tenor,  out  of  the  town  treasuiy  towards 
the  building  a  bridge  over  the  river  at  the  mouth  of  Toantick 
[Long  Meadow]  Brook,"  provided  "  that  there  shall  l)e  no  far- 
ther demands  on  the  town  for  building  or  repairing  a  bridge  in 
that  place."  In  February,  1759,  however,  the  town  gave 
Capt.  Thomas  Porter  five  pounds  for  building  a  bridge  "  in 
that  place;"  and  in  September,  1761,  twenty  pounds  for  the 
same  or  another  bridge. 

Five  petitioners,  in  1767,  applied  to  the  General  Assembly, 
and  asked  that  the  town  might  be  ordered  to  pay  for  and  keep 
in  repair  a  bridge  which  they  had  erected  over  the  Kaugatuck 
at  Judd's  Meadow,  at  an  expense  of  £50.  The  town  paid 
twenty-five  pounds  for  a  cart  bridge  ;  and  four  years  after- 
wards, or  in  December,  1771,  accepted  the  bridge  as  a  town 
bridge.  Before  the  close  of  the  winter,  it  was  again  carried 
away  by  a  flood,  as  w^as  the  Northbury  bridge. 

December,  1757,  the  town  voted  to  pay  Mr.  Joseph  Bron- 
son  five  pounds  "  towards  y^  building  a  cart  bridge  over  y« 
river  near  the  upper  end  of  Manhan  Meadow,  provided  he 
shall  complete  such  bridge  by  y®  first  of  December  next." 
There  are  still  remaining  slight  traces  of  the  eastern  abutment 


HISTOEY    OF    WATERBURY.  101 

of  a  bridge  a  few  rods  above  the  river  crossing  to  Steel's 
Meadow.  Joseph  Broiison  lived  where  the  Alms  House  now 
stands.  The  bridge  was  a  private  one,  and  probably  did  not 
remain  long. 

At  the  same  time,  (Dec.  '57,)  live  pounds  were  voted  to 
Capt.  Thomas  Porter  for  a  good  horse  bridge  which  he  pro- 
posed to  build  over  the  river  at  Beaver  Meadow. 

It  will  be  seen  from  the  preceding  notices  that  the  work 
of  constructing  and  repairing  the  bridges  over  the  !N"angatuck 
M'as  exceedingly  burdensome.  The  freshets  in  those  days  are 
believed  to  have  been  more  frequent  and  destructive  than 
now.  The  bridges,  too,  were  less  substantially  built,  and  the 
people  undertook  to  maintain  too  many  of  them. 

It  may  surprise  the  present  generation  to  know  that  the 
thought  was  once  entertained  of  improving  the  Naugatuck 
River,  and  then  using  it  for  the  purposes  of  navigation.  De- 
cember 21st,  1761,  Abraham  Ilickox  and  Stephen  Upson,  Jr., 
petitioned  the  town  that  men  might  be  permitted  to  "  work 
at  clearing  the  river,"  and  have  their  work  allowed  as  high- 
way work,  "  it  having  been  conjectured  that  the  river  from 
"Waterbury  to  Derby  might  be  made  navigable  for  battooing." 
There  seems  to  have  been  no  action  on  the  petition. 


CIIAPTEE    IX. 


IXDIAX  WARS :  THE  GREAT  FLOOD  :  THE  GREAT  SICKNESS. 

From  1689,  when  William  and  Mary  ascended  the  throne 
of  England,  to  the  peace  of  Utrecht,  in  1713,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  about  four  years  from  1697  to  1702,  England  and 
France  were  constantly  at  war.  The  English  colonies  were 
of  course  involved.     Durino-  all  this  time,  the  Indians  of  Can- 


102  HISTORY    OF    WATEKBUKY. 

ada,  N^ew  Brunswick  and  N^ova  Scotia,  and  tlie  eastern  and 
northern  parts  of  Maine,  were  under  the  influence  and  control 
of  the  French,  Marauding  parties  of  Indians,  or  French  and 
Indians,  made^requent  hostile  expeditions  to  the  infant  settle- 
ments of  New  England,  destroying  the  crops,  driving  off  the 
cattle,  firing  dwellings,  and  massacreing  the  inhabitants,  or 
carrying  them  into  captivity.  The  colonies,  particularly  the 
weaker  ones,  were  kept  in  a  state  of  perpetual  alarm.  During 
this  whole  period,  Waterbury  was  a  frontier  town  and  much 
exposed  from  the  small  number  of  its  people,  the  want  of  for- 
tified places  and  its  distance  from  efiectual  succor.  It  was 
not  till  1720  that  Litchfield  w'as  settled  on  the  north,  aflording 
protection  in  that  direction.  With  Woodbury  and  Derby  on 
the  west  and  south,  our  fathers  had  little  intercourse  for  many 
years. 

By  an  act  of  the  colonial  government,  the  people  of  Water- 
bury,  during  much  of  the  time  of  which  I  have  been  speak- 
ing, were  required  to  keep  two  men  employed  as  scouts  "  to 
discover  the  designs  of  the  enemy,  and  to  give  intelligence 
should  they  make  their  appearance."  They  performed  this 
duty  in  rotation.  Elevated  places  which  overlooked  the  vil- 
lage and  the  meadows  where  the  men  labored  during  the 
day  were  selected,  w^here  the  sentinels  were  placed.  Newel's 
Hill,  east  of  Willard  Spencer's,  was  one  of  these  places,  and  the' 
high  ground  back  of  the  house  occupied  by  the  late  Daniel 
Hayden  {David  Hayden  on  the  map)  was  another.  Tlie  re- 
cords show  the  preparations  which  were  made  from  time  to 
time  for  defense  : — 

April  9">,  1*700.  The  town  voted  [in  consequence  of  apprehended  trouble 
from  the  Indians]  to  fortify  Ens.  Stanley's  house  and  if  it  should  proue  trouble- 
some times  and  y«  town  see  they  have  need,  two  more  should  they  be  able. 

Att  ye  same  meeting  ye  town  agreed  by  uoate  for  y«  building  y*  fort  about 
ensign  Standly's  hous  that  the  town  go  abought  it  forthwith,  al  men  and  boys 
and  teams  y*  are  able  to  worck  and  to  begin  to  morrow,  and  he  y'  shall  neglect 
to  go  on  with  the  worck  till  it  be  dun  shall  forthwith  pay  to  the  aduantage  of  y» 
worck  2s  6d  for  a  man  and  6s  for  a  team  a  day. 

Aprill:  IS*"",  1703  y*  town  desired  y^  towns  men  to  prouid  a  town  stock  of  ami- 
nition  according  to  law  as  soon  as  they  can  conueniently  and  if  need  be  to  caus  a 
rate  to  be  mad  for  to  purchis  s^  stock. 

[At  the  next  meeting  in  Oct.]  the  town  mad  choys  of  Left  Timothy  Standly  for 
to  keep  ye  town  stock  of  ammonition:  for  ye  town.     [Each  town  was  required  by 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  103 

statute  to  keep  "  a  barrel  of  good  powder,  two  hundred  weight  of  bullets,  and 
three  hundred  flints,  for  every  sixty  listed  souldiers,  and  after  that  proportion.'' 
Left.  Stanley  commanded  the  train  band ;  of  course  it  was  meet  that  he  should 
have  the  charge  of  the  "  military  stores."] 

March  y^=2o=1704=  y«  town  agreed  to  fortifi  Mr.  Southmaid's  hous,  and 
deak  judd  Left  Stanly  and  tho  judd  iur  was  appointed  to  stake  out  each  man  his 
proportion  according  to  their  gran  leauey. 

In  May,  170-i,  the  General  Court  designated  Waterbury  as 
one  of  tlie  frontier  towns.  They  ordered  that  ten  men  should 
"  be  put  in  garrison"  in  each  of  the  towns  of  Danbury,  Wood- 
bury, Waterbury  and  Simsbury. 

Feb  31  1706-7  the  town  agreed  to  buld  the  foert  that  is  at  left  standlis  strong, 
at  the  same  meeting  the  act  was  past  to  build  a  nue  foart  at  the  east  end  of  the 
town  at  the  place  wher  they  shall  agre  dek  thomas  judd  was  chosing  comiti  to 
asist  the  townsmen  laying  the  s<*  foarts  out  and  to  state  euiri  [every]  man['8]  pre 
posun  [proportion]  acording  to  his  leui. 

An  alarm  was  spread  through  the  country  early  in  1707,  in 
consequence  of  intelligence  that  the  French  and  Indians  of 
Canada  were  planning  a  descent  upon  the  colonies.  It  was 
reported,  too,  that  the  Indians  of  Woodbury  and  New  Milford 
— the  Pootatucks  and  Wiantenucks — had  formed  an  alliance 
with  the  enemy.  A  council  of  war  was  convened  in  Hartford 
in  February,  and  it  was  resolved  that  the  frontier  towns  upon 
the  west,  which  were  most  ex]50sed — Simsbury,  Waterbury, 
Woodbury,  and  Danbury — should  be  fortified  with  all  possible 
despatch.  As  Waterbury  had  sustained  great  losses  from  the 
floods,  it  was  resolved  that  the  Governor  and  Council,  as  an 
encouragement  to  the  w' ork,  would  recommend  to  the  Assem- 
bly an  abatement  of  the  country  rates  (colony  taxes)  of  the 
town.* 

The  people  of  Waterbury  bestirred  themselves  in  due  time. 
The  work  of  "  cutting  bushes"  was  laid  aside.  A  statute,  in 
those  days,  required  the  selectmen  of  every  town  to  warn 
every  male  person  from  fourteen  years  old  to  seventy  (with 
certain  exceptions)  to  work  one  day  in  each  year  "  in  cutting 
down  and  clearing  the  underwood  in  any  highways,  commons, 
or  otlier  j^laces  agreed  on  by  the  town,"  the  object  being  to 
improve  the  pasture,  &c.     It  w^as  this  work  doubtless  tliat  was 

*  Trumbull's  History  of  Connecticut,  I,  235. 


104 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 


to  give  way  to  tlie  pressure  of  impending  war.     I  cojjy  from 
tlie  record : — 

June  y^  23 — 1707  y^  town  by  uoate  considering  our  troubles  and  feere  of  an 
enemie  do  agree  to  lay  a  sid  cuting  busshis  which  was  warned  for  this  day  till 
after  micalmast,  and  this  day  forthwith  to  go  abought  finshing  and  repayring  y® 
forts,  and  to  finish  them  by  wensday  next  at  night  [;]  and  he  or  they  y'  shall 
neglect  to  do  their  part  of  s"!  foorts  according  to  y®  intent  of  this  act  and  direction 
of  y«  com~ty  shall  be  proseeded  against  by  distress  as  y^  law  directs  in  rates  [;] 
y«  price  of  y*  worck  to  be  stated  by  y«  com~ty — att  the  same  meeting  Leiu~Tim~ 
Stanly  serj.  Isaac  brunson  and  Stephen  ubson  sen'  was  chosen  a  com~ty  with  y« 
townsmen  for  y*  above  s'J  worck. 

At  the  October  Session,  in  1707,  the  General  Court  made 
lil)eral  grants  of  money  to  the  frontier  towns  for  their  prompt- 
ness and  zeal  in  fortifying  themselves.  Waterbm-y  received 
£15,  to  be  divided  among  its  people  according  to  the  amount 
of  labor  performed. 

At  the  October  (?)  Session  of  the  Assembly,  in  1708,  it  was 
enacted,  that  two  forts  should  be  erected  in  Waterbury,  and 
that  garrisons  should  be  maintained  at  the  public  charge  at 
Simsbury  and  Waterbury,  two  in  each  place.  Thus  the  gov- 
ernment assumed  the  responsibility  and  the  expense  of  de- 
fending the  people  of  Waterbury,  The  latter,  however,  still 
supported  one  of  the  forts  at  their  own  cost : — 

Novem'  15"'  1708  y«  town  agree  to  have  three  forts  in  y^  Town  one  built  aty«  , 
west  end  of  y®  Town  on  the  cuntry  account  one  at  Leiu  Stanlys  on  y«  cuntry  ac- 
count one  at  John  hopkins  hous  on  y®  Town  account — [Dec.  13,  1708]  the  fort  to 
be  bult  at  the  west  end  of  the  town  shall  be  bult  about  Mr.  Southmayds  hous. 

These  fortiiications,  so  called,  were  distributed  in  such  a  way 
as  to  be  of  convenient  access  to  the  scattered  population.  They 
were  constructed  of  logs  or  sticks  of  timber  placed  firmly  in  the 
ground,  perpendicularly  and  close  together,  with  a  door  prop- 
erly secured  for  passing  in  and  out.  The  houses  to  be  for- 
tified were  thus  surrounded  by  a  high  and  strong  wooden  wall. 
Such  a  wall  would  afford  very  good  security  against  Indian 
attacks.  A  small  body  of  troops  placed  within  one  of  the  en- 
closures, well  provided  with  guns  and  ammunition,  and  firing 
through  crevices,  could  resist  and  beat  oft'  a  large  body  of  hos- 
tile savages.  To  these  fortified  houses  all  the  people  resorted 
at  night,  returning  again  in  the  morning  to  their  houses  and 


HISTORY    OF    WATEKBURY.  105 

tlie  labors  of  the  day.  But,  notwithstanding  all  that  was  done, 
tlie  affairs  of  the  settlement  remained  in  a  critical  state. 

In  the  spring  of  1709,  the  New  England  colonies,  at  the  in- 
stance of  the  royal  government,  fitted  out  an  expedition 
against  Canada,  which  was  to  meet  an  English  force  at  Boston 
and  sail  for  Quebec.  Of  the  three  hundred  and  fifty  men 
which  Connecticut  provided,  Waterbury  furnished  four.  The 
English  fleet  never  arrived  and  the  enterprise  was  a  failure. 
One  quarter  or  more  of  the  troops,  says  Dr.  Trumbull,  died. 
Connecticut  lost  ninety  men. 

In  1710,  a  party  of  Indians,  or  French  and  Indians,  made  a 
visit  to  Simsbury  and  Waterbury.  In  the  south  part  of  what 
is  now  Plymouth,  they  killed  a  man  named  Holt.  (lie  may 
have  been  a  transient  person,  or  a  hunter  from  another  town.) 
The  place  is  called  Mount  Holt,  from  the  circumstance  of  the 
nuissacre.  It  is  a  spur  of  Mount  Toby.  About  the  same  time, 
some  Indians  came  down  from  Canada,  on  their  customary 
errand,  and  ascended  a  hill,  or  mountain,  on  the  west  side  of 
the  river,  opposite  Mount  Taylor,  to  reconnoitre.  They  saw 
Jonathan  Scott  seated  under  a  large  oak  tree,  in  Hancock's 
Meadow,  eating  his  dinner,  with  his  two  sons,  aged  fourteen 
and  eleven,  at  a  little  distance.  Tlie  Indians  approached 
stealthily,  keeping  in  a  line  with  the  tree  and  Mr.  Scott.  In 
this  way  they  reached  him  unperceived  and  made  him  pris- 
oner. The  boys  took  to  their  heels ;  but  the  father,  in  order 
to  save  his  own  life,  which  he  was  given  to  understand  would 
be  taken  if  he  refused,  recalled  his  sons.  Thus  the  three  were 
captured.  The  Indians  then  retraced  their  steps  rapidly  with 
their  prizes,  having  taken  the  precaution  to  cut  off  Scott's 
right  thumb,  in  order  to  cripjjle  him  if  he  should  make  resist- 
ance. 

The  wife  of  Jonathan  Scott  was  Hannah  Hawks,  the  daugh- 
ter of  John  Hawks  of  Deerfield.  Her  mother  was  killed  in 
the  Indian  attack  on  that  town  on  the  terrible  twenty-ninth  of 
Februar}',  1704.  Her  only  sister,  Elizabeth,  was  taken  pris- 
oner and  put  to  death  on  her  way  to  Canada.  Her  only 
brother  John  and  his  wife  and  three  children,  were  also  slain. 
Poor  John  Hawks  was  thus  bereft  of  all  his  family  except 
Hannah  of  Waterbury.     AYhat  must  have  been  the  anguish  of 


106  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

both  when  tliis  new  bereavement  became  known !     Hawks 
spent  his  latter  days  with  his  daughter  in  Waterbur3^ 
The  following  vote  explains  itself: 

[July  aG""  mo]  the  town  by  vote  gaue  Jonathan  Scott  his  town  rat  for  1Y09 
for  getting  out  of  town  wiliani  stanerds  wife  [a  transient  person  whom  the  select- 
men had  warned  out  of  town,]  and  in  consideration  of  his  present  sureumstanses 
he  being  in  captivity. 

The  General  Court,  also,  in  1711,  abated  the  colony  tax  of 
Hannah  Scott,  "  in  consequence  of  her  husband  being  in  cap- 
tivity in  Canada." 

After  the  peace,  Jonathan  Scott,  with  his  eldest  son,  Jona- 
than, returned  to  Waterbury.  The  younger  son,  John,  be- 
came accustomed  to  savage  life,  preferred  it,  and  never  return- 
ed. This  preference,  under  similar  circumstances,  is  not  a 
solitary  instance.  AVhite  people  who  have  been  a  long  time 
with  the  Indians,  particularly  if  their  acquaintance  began  in 
childhood,  very  generally  become  attached  to  them  and  their 
mode  of  living.  It  is  far  easier  to  make  a  savage  out  of,  than 
into,  a  civilized  man.* 

At  the  May  session  of  1721,  Scott  applied  to  the  General 
Assembly  for  pecuniary  assistance  on  account  of  the  expenses 
of  his  captivity  and  his  attempts  to  release  his  son.  He  was 
allowed  ten  pounds.  In  October,  1725,  he  again  petitioned  ; 
this  time  for  aid  to  get  his  son  out  of  bondage,  and  obtained  a 
grant  of  £5. 

The  capture  of  Scott  and  his  sons,  of  course,  produced  great 
excitement  among  the  inhabitants  of  Waterbury.  The  alarm 
was  greater  from  their  not  knowing  the  extent  of  the  danger, 
or  the  time  an  impending  storm  might  break  over  them.  Their 
utmost  vigilance  might  fail  to  give  them  the  needed  warning. 
It  was  in  this  state  of  uncertainty  that  the  following  vote  was 
taken  : 

July  20,  1710  the  town  by  uote  mad  chose  of  Mr.  John  Soth  mad  de  Thomas 
Judd  1ft  timothy  standly  sr  John  hopkins  a  comity  to  draw  up  in  writing  the  sur- 
comstanses  of  the  town  in  this  tim  of  ware  and  represent  to  the  general  cort  to  be 
holden  in  New  haven  on  agst  4  1710  by  their  dubotys  to  be  by  them  presented 
to  said  cort 

The  General  Court  made  provision  for  the  safety  of  the 
town,  as  appears  from  the  colony  records  : 

♦  See  Hutchinson's  History  of  Massachusetts,  II,  p.  128,  note. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBUEY.  107 

In  consideration  of  the  remoteness  of  the  town  of  Waterbury  from  the  County 
town  and  the  committee  of  war  appointed  there,  by  reason  whereof  they  cannot 
have  so  speedy  relief  up  on  the  sudden  approach  of  the  enemy  as  is  requisite — 
This  Assembly  do  constitute  and  appoint  John  Ailing,  Esq.,  Major  Samuel  Ells, 
Jeremiah  Osborn,  Esq.,  and  Capt  John  munson  or  any  three  of  them,  to  be  a 
committee  of  war  with  full  power  up  on  the  application  of  the  inhabitants  of  said 
town  of  Waterbury,  and  in  case  of  danger  on  the  approach  of  the  enemy,  to  raise 
and  send  men  thither  from  New  Haven  County  for  their  relief  by  scouting  or  lying 
in  garrison  there,  as  occasion  may  require. 

The  next  year,  in  consequence  of  tlie  continued  threaten- 
ing aspect  of  aftairs,  the  town  appointed  a  committee  as  fol- 
lows : 

At  a  town  meeting  in  waterbury  Aprill  9""  1711  the  town  by  note  mad  chos  of 
Mr.  John  Southmad  1ft  Timothy  Standly  Thomas  Judd:  John  Hopkins  sr  Isac 
brunson  sr  steuen  upson  gorg  scott  as  a  commity  to  writ  to  the  commity  of  safety 
at  new  haven  and  to  Represent  our  cas  to  said  commity  consarning  our  present 
fears  of  the  common  enymy  to  take  their  aduice  and  counsel  in  said  afar 

It  is  difficult  to  picture  to  ourselves  the  condition  of  our 
forefathers  at  the  time  of  which  I  have  been  speaking.  They 
numbered  only  from  thirty  to  thirty-three  families  throughout 
the  whole  period,  there  being  one  family  less  in  1713,  accord- 
ing to  my  estimate,  than  in  1685.  The  whole  population, 
doubtless,  did  not  amount  to  more  than  two  hundred  souls. 
They  were  far  removed  from  sympathizing  friends,  and  were 
destitute  of  many  of  the  comforts  and  all  the  luxuries  of  life. 
They  toiled  all  day  to  wring  a  livelihood  from  an  unwilling  soil, 
and  too  frecpiently  spent  the  night  in  watching.  Their  dwellings 
at  this  day  would  hardly  be  called  tenantable.  They  all  slejDt, 
during  periods  of  supposed  danger,  in  the  fortified  houses,  as 
before  stated.  These  were  larger  than  the  others,  and  were 
selected  in  part  for  that  reason  ;  but  the  three,  or  the  two, 
when  but  two  existed,  could  not  have  properly  accommodated 
so  many.  In  the  winter  season,  when  all  needed  shelter,  they 
must  have  been  crowded  to  an  inconvenient  and  unwholesome 
degree.  Indian  warfare  is  of  a  kind  calculated  to  fill  the 
breasts  of  a  peaceful  and  exposed  population  with  dreadful 
apprehensions  and  to  chill  the  blood  of  the  most  courageous. 
The  Indian  proM'ls  about  by  night  and  conceals  himself  by 
day  and  delights  most  to  strike  his  victim  unseen.  The  se- 
crecy of  his  movements  is  only  equaled  by  his  fleetness.     He 


108  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 

disdains  the  arts  and  also  tlie  virtnes  of  civilized  warfare. 
He  falls  upon  the  weak  and  unprotected,  slaughters  old  men, 
women  and  children,  waylays  the  traveler  and  tortures  the 
captive.  Cunning,  treacherous,  bloodthirsty,  he  dogs  the  foot- 
steps of  his  enemy  and  waits  his  chance.  He  may  be  beaten 
back,  but  he  returns  to  the  attack  and  is  subdued  with  diffi- 
culty. It  is  not  so  much  his  object  to  obtain  victory  as  to  de- 
stroy his  adversary  and  lay  waste  his  country.  This  is  the  foe 
with  which  the  early  settlers  of  Waterbury  were  threatened. 
It  does  not  appear  that  they  were  actually  assailed,  except  in 
the  instances  mentioned  ;  but  they  were  for  long  periods  in  a 
state  of  constant  apprehension,  expecting  an  attack  and  fear- 
ing surprise.  The  perplexing  uncertainty  and  frequent  alarms 
to  which  they  were  exposed,  doubtless  tried  their  fortitude, 
putting  it  to  a  severer  test  than  the  dangers  of  active  and  open 
war.  In  the  latter,  there  are  excitements  and  incentives  which 
keep  up  the  spirits.  The  idea  of  "  glory  "  strengthens  the  arm 
and  makes  the  heart  courageous.  But  Indian  warfare  has  few 
attractions.  The  laurels  won  in  an  Indian  fight  are  not  many. 
A  wound  received  in  some  great  civilized  battle  is  deemed 
honorable,  but  there  is  little  glory  in  being  scalped. 

After  the  peace  of  IT  13,  there  was  but  little  trouble  or  ap- 
prehension from  the  natives  for  several  years.  In  1720,  how- 
ever, hostilities  were  begun,  on  the  part  of  the  Indians,  on^ 
the  eastern  frontier  of  New  England,  when  Canso,  an  English 
settlement  in  Nova  Scotia,  was  attacked  and  several  of  its  in- 
habitants killed.  This  outrage  and  others  which  followed  led 
to  a  declaration  of  war  by  Massachusetts,  in  1722.  Connecti- 
cut was  invited  to  join  in  the  contest,  but  declined.  She,  how- 
ever, agreed  to  send  a  small  force  to  protect  the  county  of 
Hampshire  from  threatened  attacks  from  the  north  and  took 
vigorous  measure  to  put  her  own  frontier  towns  in  a  jjosture 
of  defense.  In  the  new  town  of  Litchfield,  a  man  (Capt.  Jacob 
Griswold)  was  captured  by  a  party  of  Indians  and  carried  oflP, 
but  he  made  his  escape  the  first  night.  Soon  after,  (Aug. 
1722,)  one  Joseph  Harris  was  murdered  near  the  place  where 
Griswold  was  taken.*  In  1724,  the  Assembly  gave  Water- 
bury    authority  to   employ   six  men   "to   guard   y^    men   in 

*  Morris's  Statistical  Account  of  Litchfield. 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUEY.  109 

their  outfields  at  the  discression  of  y®  commission  officers  of 
sd.  Town."  The  authority  thus  given  was  exercised  for  about 
one  month. 

Though  danger  was  sometimes  apprehended,  the  early  col- 
onists of  this  State  did  not  suffer  much  from  the  resident  tribes 
of  Indians  in  the  nortli western  part  of  the  Colony.  The  lat- 
ter, few  in  number,  w^ere  generally  peaceful  and  friendly. 
They  may  sometimes  have  regarded  the  progress  of  the  wliites 
with  jealousy  and  seriously  contemplated  hostilities;  but,  as 
a  common  thing,  they  courted  their  alliance  and  gave  them 
kindly  assistance  in  extremity.  For  a  time,  they  regarded 
with  satisfaction  the  growth  among  them  of  a  new  power 
which  promised  to  protect  them  from  tiieir  dreaded  enemies 
and  oppressors,  the  Mohawks  of  the  west,  to  whom  they  paid 
tril)ute. 

Still,  our  fathers  w^ere  essentially  a  martial  people.  They 
loved  and  honored  a  militarj^  life.  'No  race  of  men  ever  iield 
in  higher  esteem  individual  bravery  and  strategical  skill. 
The  circumstances  of  their  position  influenced  their  opinions. 
The  warlike  virtues  were  to  them  a  necessity.  They  were 
obliged  to  cultivate  them  for  their  own  protection ;  and  what- 
ever such  men  seriously  undertake  they  excel  in.  This  conti- 
nent never  could  have  been  settled  and  subdued  by  a  timid  or 
even  by  an  unmilitary  people.  There  was  a  demand  for  war- 
riors and  warriors  of  a  superior  order  came  forth.  The  early 
colonists  attained  the  same  excellence  in  the  Indian  fight  tiiat 
Crom  well's  nen  did  in  the  pitched  battle.  They  soon  became 
an  overmatch  for  the  most  warlike  of  their  enemies.  They 
beat  them  in  their  own  mode  of  carrying  on  a  contest.  They 
fouglit  for  their  firesides  and  their  existence.  They  prayed 
for  aid  to  the  God  of  Battles ;  but  they  did  not  despise  carnal 
weapons,  or  neglect  the  lessons  of  worldly  wisdom.  They  put 
their  trust  in  Providence  ;  but  they  also  kept  their  powder 
dry. 

Military  titles  were  in  high  repute  among  the  colonists. 
They  were  preferred  to  civil  or  ecclesiastical  honors.  A  cor- 
poral was  on  the  road  to  distinction.  His  office  was  occasion- 
ally, but  not  usually,  attached  to  his  name.  A  sergeant  had 
attained  distinction  and  his  title  was  never  omitted.     An  en- 


110  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 

sign  or  a  lieutenant  was  lifted  quite  above  the  heads  of  his  fel- 
lows. A  captain  was  necessarily  a  man  of  great  influence, 
whose  opinion  was  taken  in  all  the  weighty  concerns  of  a 
town.  Few  aspired  to  the  exalted  rank  of  a  major.  It  was 
the  reward  of  the  most  distinguished  services.  Major  Talcott 
and  Major  Treat  were  rendered  illustrious  by  their  titles  as 
well  as  their  achievements. 

The  drum  was  a  favorite  instrument  among  our  ancestors, 
and  was  put  to  many  uses.  It  answered  the  purpose  of  a 
town  bell.  It  called  the  people  to  meeting  on  Sundays.  It 
summoned  them  to  the  fortified  houses  at  night.  It  gave  the 
signal  for  the  town  gatherings  on  public  business.  It  told  the 
2)eople  when  to  turn  out  "  to  burn  about  the  common  fence." 

A  law  of  the  colony  at  the  time  of  and  after  the  settlement 
of  Mattatuck,  required  that  "  all  white  male  persons,  from  the 
age  of  sixteen  to  sixty  years,  except  magistrates,  justices  of 
the  peace,  the  secretary,  church  officers,  allowed  physicians, 
chyrurgeons,  schoolmasters,  representatives  or  deputies  for  the 
time  being,  one  miller  to  each  grist-mill,  constant  herdsmen 
and  mariners,  sheriffs,  constables,  constant  ferrymen,  lame  per- 
sons, or  otherwise  disabled  in  body,"  should  bear  arms  and  be 
subject  to  military  duty.  Six  days  yearly  were  devoted  to 
martial  exercises,  and  a  giiard  in  every  town,  in  no  case  of 
less  than  eight  soldiers,  Avas  required  to  be  maintained  on  the 
sabbath  and  other  days  of  public  worship.  This  guard,  how- 
ever, was  dispensed  with  in  1714,  there  no  longer  being  occa- 
sion for  it.*  The  law  also  provided,  that  every  train  band  of 
sixty-four  soldiers  should  have  a  captain,  lieutenant,  ensign 
and  four  sergeants — that  a  train  band  of  thirty-two  soldiers 
should  have  a  lieutenant,  ensign  and  two  sergeants,  and  that 
a  train  band  of  twenty-four  soldiers  should  "  have  but  two  ser- 
geants," in  all  cases,  exclusive  of  officers. 

The  Mattatuck  settlers  probably  organized  themselves  into 
a  military  company  so  soon  as  their  numbers  warranted  this 
measure.  There  is  no  record  showing  this,  and  they  were  not 
at  that  period  exposed  to  the  attacks  of  an  enemy,  but  such 
was  the  custom  of  the  times.     As  early  as  1682,  they  had  two 

*  Field's  Middlesex  County. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKY.  Ill 

sergeants  in  the  persons  of  Thomas  Judd,  Sen.  and  John  Stan- 
ley. (These  individnals  at  that  date  ^vere  so  denominated.) 
They  must  then  have  numbered,  at  least,  twenty-four  soldiers 
besides  ofiicers.  In  records  bearing  the  dates  of  1686,  1687, 
and  1688,  Judd  is,  in  a  few  instances,  called  ensign,  but  these 
are  copied  records,  and  a  title  which  he  afterwards  bore,  not 
found  in  the  original,  may  have  been  applied  to  him  negli- 
gently ;  for,  it  will  be  observed,  he  is  repeatedly  styled  ser- 
geant during  the  years  mentioned. 

After  Andros'  usurpation  and  the  resumption  of  the  govern- 
liient  under  the  charter  in  1689,  the  Waterbury  train  band  was 
found  to  number,  at  least,  tliirty-two  rank  and  file  and  became 
entitled  to  a  higher  grade  of  officers.  It  was  then,  Oct.  1689, 
that  John  Stanley  was  appointed  and  confirmed  by  the  Gene- 
ral Court  as  lieutenant,  and  Thomas  Judd,  (Sen.,)  as  ensign. 
At  the  same  time,  Samuel  Hickox  (Sen.)  and  (probably)  Tim- 
othy Stanley  were  chosen  sergeants.  Isaac  Bronson  and  John 
Welton  were  the  corporals. 

After  Lieut,  Stanley's  removal  from  the  town  and  Sergeant 
Ilickox's  death,  both  about  1694-5,  Ensign  Judd  was  made 
lieutenant;  Sergeant  Timothy  Stanley,  ensign  ;  Corporal  Isaac 
Bronson  and  (probably)  Dea.  Thonuis  Judd,  sergeants.  Lieut. 
Judd  died  in  1702-3,  and  Ensign  Stanley  succeeded  him  in 
command  of  the  company,  M'hile  Deacon  Thomas  Judd  was 
made  ensign.  These  continued  to  be  the  officers  till  1715, 
when  the  soldiers  of  the  company  numbered,  for  the  first 
time,  sixty-four,  and  from  this  circumstance  were  allowed  to 
have  a  captain.  Lieut.  Tliomas  Judd  (tlie  deacon)  was  pro- 
moted to  this  high  position,  and  Ens.  John  Hopkins  was  ap- 
pointed lieutenant.  The  next  captains  before  1732,  were,  suc- 
cessively. Dr.  Ephraim  Warner,  AVilliam  Hickox  and  William 
Judd.  In  1732,  the  company  was  divided  into  two  by  author- 
ity of  the  Assembly.  William  Judd  and  Timothy  Hopkins 
appear  to  have  been  the  captains  in  that  year. 

But  during  the  period  to  which  the  preceding  remarks  im- 
mediately refer,  Waterbury  suffered  severely  from  other  causes 
than  war.  In  Eeb.,  1691,  happened  the  Great  Flood,  so 
called.  Owing  to  rains  and  the  sudden  melting  of  the  snows, 
the  river  left  its  banks  and  covered  the  meadows,  rising  to  a 


112  IIISTOEY    OF    WATERBURY. 

height  never  known  before  or  since.  The  water  flowed  along 
tlie  low  ground  back  of  the  house  of  Mrs.  Giles  Ives,  and  sub- 
merged a  portion  of  the  Green  w^hicli  is  in  front  of  the  Epis- 
copal Church.  Great  damage  was  done  to  the  river  lands 
and  sore  distress  was  tlie  consequence.  A  large  proportion 
had  been  recently  plowed,  while  the  surface  had  been  loosened 
and  softened  by  the  rains  and  the  coming  out  of  the  frost. 
As  a  consequence,  the  soil  was  wholly  washed  away  in  many 
places,  while  that  which  remained  was  covered  with  sand  and 
stones.  Thus  the  suffering  inhabitants  saw  their  labors  come 
to  naught.  Their  best  lands  M^ere  almost  ruined  and  their 
hopes  for  the  present  blasted.  This  dreadful  calamity  was  the 
cause  of  great  discouragement.  Many  forsook  the  place  in 
despair. 

We  have  recently  had  examples  of  what  the  Naugatuck  can 
do  in  freshet-time.  On  the  13th  day  of  I^ovember,  1853,  there 
came  down  the  valley,  on  short  notice,  such  a  body  of  water 
as  had  not  been  seen  by  the  oldest  persons  living.  Those  not 
acquainted  with  the  ancient  performances  of  our  usually  quiet 
and  orderly  river,  were  astonished  and  in  some  instances  dis- 
mayed. Some  of  the  manufacturing  companies  suffered  greatly 
from  the  washing  away  of  their  race-way  embankments. 
Bridges  were  carried  off.  and  in  Derby  (Ansonia)  some  persons 
were  drowned  wdio  happened  to  be  crossing  a  foot-bridge  at 
the  time  it  gave  way. 

On  the  thirteenth  of  April,  1854,  there  was  another  great 
flood,  the  water  rising  in  Waterbury  within  eighteen  inches 
as  high  as  in  the  previous  November.  At  Derby,  owing  to  a 
greater  freshet  in  the  Ilousatonic,  the  water  was  highest  in 
April. 

The  most  recent  of  the  great  floods,  previous  to  the  two  last, 
occurred  in  1801. 

One  reason,  doubtless,  why  the  floods  of  the  Naugatuck  do 
less  damage  now-a-days  than  formerly  to  the  meadows  upon 
its  banks,  is  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  trees  and  bushes  which 
once  obstructed  the  current,  forcing  the  water  out  of  its  natu- 
ral course  and  throwing  it  into  eddies,  have  been  removed.  It 
is  when  water  is  resisted  by  a  barrier,  or  is  fretted  continually 
by  obstacles,  that  it  becomes  such  a  terriflc  physical  agent. 


r^--2^ 


-^ 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  113 

111  October,  1712,  a  great  sickness,  mortal  beyond  example 
in  the  previous  history  of  the  town,  broke  out.  It  raged  until 
September,  1713,  carrying  off,  in  eleven  months,  more  than 
one  tenth  of  the  population.  It  was  known  afterwards,  for  a 
long  time,  as  the  Great  Sickness.  The  well  were  not  numerous 
enough  to  take  care  of  the  sick  and  bury  the  dead.  Several 
families  lost  three  of  their  number,  and  several  others  two. 
Of  the  twenty-one  victims,  (ten  of  them  heads  of  families,) 
seven  died  between  the  sixth  and  twenty-tirst  of  March, 
1712-13. 


CHAPTER    X. 


BACHELOR    PROPRIETORS. 


By  reason  of  the  Indian  wars,  the  great  flood,  the  great  sick- 
ness and  other  causes  incident  to  a  new  and  feeble  settlement, 
in  want  of  almost  everything,  to  say  nothing  of  a  laborious  and 
niggardly  agriculture,  Waterbury  did  not  flourish  for  a  long 
time  after  its  settlement.  The  population  was  as  great  (if  not 
greater)  in  1685  or  1686,  eight  or  nine  years  after  the  planters 
left  their  Farmington  homes,  as  at  any  time  during  the  first 
thirty-five  years.  It  was  at  the  period  first  named  that  the  pro- 
prietors, who  had  secured  their  rights,  began  to  remove  from 
the  town.  Joseph  Hickox  led  the  way,  setting  a  very  bad  ex- 
ample. He  may  have  been  deficient  in  "  backbone."  He 
was  in  Woodbury  early  in  1686.  He  died  there  the  next  year, 
his  being  the  first  death  among  the  old  proprietors.  In  1687, 
Thomas  Hancox  sold  his  house  and  returned  to  Farmington. 
Soon  after,  Benjamin  Jones  removed  to  New  Haven  and  died 
in  1089.     Thomas  Xewell  disappeared  in  1690,  going  back  to 


114  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY. 

Farmington.  Samuel  Scott  followed  him  in  the  same  year,  or 
the  year  after.  John  Newell  and  John  Stanley  turned  tlieir 
footsteps  in  the  same  direction,  the  first  in  1694,  the  last  early 
in  1695.  Stanley  was  a  prominent  and  most  influential  man, 
but  not,  it  seems,  of  the  iron  mould  required  for  the  valley  of 
the  Naugatuck.  His  defection  was  much  regretted.  John 
Scovill  went  off  in  1696  and  brought  up  in  Haddam.  John 
Warner  stuck  by  till  about  1T03,  when  he  too  gave  up  and 
went  back  to  Farmington.  Joseph  Gaylord's  courage  held  out 
till  1707,  when  he  followed  his  sons  to  Durham.  Thomas 
Judd,  Jr.,  town  clerk  and  school  master,  whom  the  people  de- 
lighted to  honor,  persevered  in  a  course  of  well-doing  till  1709, 
when,  for  some  reason  unknown  to  the  writer,  he  removed  to 
Hartford,  (now  West  Hartford.)  He  was  the  last  of  the  old 
proprietors  of  Waterbury  who  thought  it  their  duty  or  for 
their  interest  to  leave  their  brethren  in  the  hour  of  darkness 
and  peril.  They  numbered  eleven  in  all.  One  only,  Eichard 
Porter,  went  away  at  a  later  period.  All  the  others  continued 
at  their  posts  and  laid  their  bones  in  the  town  they  had 
founded. 

During  the  period  of  gloom  about  which  I  have  been  writ- 
ing, many  of  the  proprietors  who  remained  were  removed  by 
death.  The  first  who  died  w^as  Robert  Porter,  the  second, 
Philip  Judd,  both  in  1689.  The  next  was  John  Carrington,  in 
1690.  Edmund  Scott,  Sen.,  died  in  1691  ;  Abraham  Andruss, 
(cooper,)  in  1693;  Samuel  Ilickox,  a  leading  man,  in  1694; 
John  Bronson,  in  1696  ;  Jeremiah  Peck,  the  first  minister,  in 
1699  ;  Obadiah  Richards,  late  in  1702  ;  Thomas  Judd,  Sen., 
second  to  none  as  a  man  of  character,  early  in  1703  ;  Thomas 
Richason,  in  1712.  There  were  ten  in  all,  which  number, 
added  to  the  eleven  that  removed,  makes  twenty-one  of  the 
original  proprietors  who  had  disappeared  in  1713,  leaving  fif- 
teen who  were  still  living  in  Waterbury  at  that  time. 

It  has  been  often  remarked  that  sickness  and  mortality  are 
greater  in  the  first  years  of  a  settlement  than  at  a  later  period. 
While  the  first  generation  is  short-lived,  the  second  or  third  is 
often  distinguished  by  unusual  longevity.  These  facts  are 
illustrated  in  the  history  of  Waterbury.     Its  early  inhabitants, 


IIISTOKY    OF   WATEKBUKY.  115 

in  too  many  instances,  died  young,  while  its  later  population 
is  somewhat  remarkable  for  instances  of  old  age.* 

Besides  the  losses  referred  to,  there  were  many  young  men, 
sons  of  proprietors,  who  either  died  or  removed  from  the  town 
during  the  period  in  question.  The  mortality  among  them 
was  very  considerable.  The  families  of  the  proprietors  who 
died,  in  many  cases,  left  the  place.  This  was  the  fact  with 
the  entire  families  of  Philip  Judd,  John  Carrington  and  Abra- 
ham Aiidruss,  2d,  and  parts  of  the  families  of  Samuel  Hickox, 
John  Bronson,  Obadiah  Kichards  and  Thomas  Kichason,  If 
a  proprietor  removed,  he,  as  a  general  rule,  took  all  his  near 
kindred  with  him ;  or  if  any  were  left,  they  did  not  stay  long. 
Thus  tlie  names  of  Hancox,  Jones,  Newell,  Stanley,  and  Gay- 
lord,  became  extinct,  temporarily  or  permanently. 

After  several  of  the  inhabitants  had  removed  from  the  town, 
and  the  young  men  had  manifested  an  inclination  to  follow 
the  example  on  account  of  the  gloomy  prospects  at  home,  the 
proprietors  began  to  inquire  what  the  emergency  demanded. 
That  their  own  sons  should  threaten  to  leave  them  in  the 
midst  of  their  trials,  was  the  source  of  unaffected  grief.  Them, 
therefore,  they  thought  to  make  contented  by  more  liberal  of- 
fers of  certain  pecuniary  advantages.  They  resorted  to  the 
means  that  the  fathers  of  the  present  age  sometimes  employ, 
when  their  children  contract  roving  habits.  That  they  might 
stick  by  their  sires  and  thus  manifest  their  attachment,  they 
gave  them  an  important  portion  of  their  estate.  In  a  proprie- 
tors' meeting  held  in  December,  1697,  the  proprietors  granted 
to  each  young  man  certain  lands  and  a  propriety  of  £4U  in  the 
commons,  all  on  certain  conditions.  For  very  good  reasons, 
the  new  proprietors  were  not  to  have  a  voice  in  giving  away 
lands.  This  limitation  of  power  was  designed  to  prevent  them 
from  helping  themselves  too  liberally,  as  boys  are  wont  to  do, 
when  they  have  free  access  to  the  paternal  estate.  I  give  be- 
low an  exact  copy  of  the  record. 


*  The  oldest  person  that  has  died  within  the  limits  of  ancient  Waterbury  was  John  Bronson,  of 
Wolcott.who  deceased  in  Nov.,  183?,  aged  one  hundred  and  two  years  and  three  months.  The 
next  oldest  (who  died  in  present  Waterbury)  was  David  Prichard,  whose  death  took  place  Dec. 
23, 173S,  at  the  age  of  one  hundred  and  one  years  and  seven  months.  I  have  the  names  of  sixty- 
two  others  who  have  died  within  the  limits  of  the  old  township  between  the  ages  of  90  and  100. 


116  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUEY. 

Att  a  metting  of  y«  propriators  in  waterbury  december  2CA  1697. 

In  order  to  y«  getting  such  yong  men  y'  desire  to  settell  in  y«  town  y«  propri- 
ators grant  to  each  one  y*  desires  to  settell  for  their  incuragment  or  accomada- 
tion  thirty  acres  of  upland  swam  [p]  and  bogey  meadow  as  alotment  with  a  pro- 
priety in  y^  commons  according  to  theyr  alotment  with  a  hous  lot  and  four  acres 
for  a  pastor  to  be  layd  out  to  them  by  y«  town  measurer  giuing  them  four  years 
to  build  a  tenantable  hous  not  less  than  sixteen  foots  square  and  he  y'  takes  up  a 
lot  and  is  not  in  way  of  improuement  and  shall  not  build  accordingly  shall  forfit 
his  lot  [;]  and  what  land  has  been  giuen  to  any  yong  man  shall  be  accounted  as 
part  of  his  lot  [;]  this  act  not  to  pregedes  former  grants  nor  highways  [;]  this  act 
to  be  in  force  for  al  such  as  liue  a  mongs  us  as  they  shall  com  of  age  and 
desire  this  priuiledg  and  be  acsepted  by  \®  propriators  but  y«  priuiledg  of  acting  in 
giuing  away  land  we  do  not  give  them  [;]  this  alotment  to  be  deemed  a  forty 
pound  alotment  in  all  diuisions  and  so  to  have  theyr  propriety  in  y«  commons  and 
after  2  [altered  from  "4"]  years  each  alotment  to  be  deemed  at  too  [altered  from 
"4"]  pounds  Estate  in  y^  bareing  town  charg:  for  4  years,  and  after  according  as 
they  improue  according  to  law  or  y«  apprisall  of  other  lands  in  y*  town  and  not 
to  make  sale  of  any  but  y*  improued  &  subdued  but  if  any  dye  here  his  heirs 
to  poses  his  lands 

At  subsequent  meetings,  certain  regulations  were  establish- 
ed, designed  for  the  government  of  the  new  jiroprietors  in  the 
taking  up  of  their  lands,  &c. 

Att  a  meeting  may  15:  1699  y«  propriators  granted  y«  yong  men  liberty  to 
take  up  their  thirty  acers  in  three  places  and  if  any  haue  perticular  grants  of  land 
to  haue  them  counted  in  y^  30  acres  and  not  to  hinder  theyr  pitches*  and  he  y' 
has  had  3  pitches  to  haue  on  [one]  more. 

Dec  23  1700  the  propriators  granted  that  thos  yong  men  that  build  in  y«  town 
plat  shall  haue  six  acers  for  a  pastor  not  takeing  it  where  it  would  do  for  a  hous 
lot  and  they  y'  go  out  furder  to  build  to  haue  four  acers  for  a  hous  lot 

The  vote  of  December,  1697,  laid  the  foundation  of  what 
were  afterwards  called  bachelor  rights  or  accommodations.  In 
order  the  more  effectually  to  secure  its  objects,  and  to  constrain, 
if  possible,  those  who  took  advantage  of  it  to  remain  in  the 
town,  the  proprietors,  at  a  subsequent  period,  so  altered  its 
conditions  as  to  require  those  claiming  its  benefits  to  reside 
with  them  five  years  after  building  a  house.  This  is  the  sup- 
plementary act : 

At  ye  same  meeting  [Feb.  22"*.  1702-3]  y®  proprietors  took  up  y*  obligation 
of  y«  yong  men  for  subdueing  and  clearing  as  in  y'  act  december  20'' :  1697  :  and 
thos  ye  haue  now  built  according  to  sd  act  to  in  habit  fiue  years  from  this  day  and 

*  The  \vor(l  pitch  in  the  record  seems  to  be  used  in  the  sense  of  choice  or  lot.  When  a  per- 
son selected  his  land  and  brought  in  an  account  of  it  to  the  measurer,  he  brought  in  his  pitch. 
Each  act  of  choice  by  which  he  selected  a  separate  tract  of  land  was  a  distinct  pitch. 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY.  117 

then  their  lands  be  their  own,  and  others  y'  are  now  acsepted  on  bacheldors 
accomodations,  and  hereaftor  shall  be  excepted  shall  build  acording  to  said  act 
and  inhabit  fine  years  after  they  haue  build  and  then  their  lands  be  their  own. 

This  vote,  so  far  as  its  action  was  retrospective — so  far  as  it 
affected  tliose  "  yong  men  "  who  had  ah-eady  been  made  pro- 
prietors under  the  act  of  December,  1697 — was  plainly  ille- 
gal ;  and  the  attempt  to  enforce  it  was  not  persisted  in. 

The  custom  of  giving  away  the  lands  of  the  town,  instead  of 
disposing  of  them  by  division,  was  established  as  the  fixed 
policy  of  the  i^roprietors.  This  policy,  because,  probably,  of 
some  objection  made  to  it,  was  declared  in  a  vote,  as  follows : 

At  a  meeting  of  y®  proprietors  in  Waterbury  January  7th  1705-6  it  being 
uoated  whether  y^  proprietors  would  diuide  theyr  commons  according  to  purchase 
or  no  y®  uoat  past  in  y*  negitiue  y'  they  would  not  deuide  their  commons  but  in 
y»  second  uoate  y'  they  would  gie  away  their  land  to  perticular  men  as  they  see 
cause  or  as  they  iudg  men  haue  need  of  it. 

But  notwithstanding  these  signal  proofs  of  liberality  and 
paternal  regard,  on  the  part  of  the  proprietors,  the  youngsters, 
in  too  many  cases,  would  not  remain  and  claim  their  lands  ;  or 
if  they  made  a  show  of  staying,  they  frequently  left  the  settle- 
ment when  they  had  resided  in  it  long  enough  to  make  sure  of 
their  bachelor  riglits.  This  conduct  was  ungrateful,  not  to  say 
provoking.  Considering  that  the  town  had  not,  at  this  time,  a 
single  able  bodied  man  to  spare,  one  is  tempted  to  call  it  cow- 
ardly. After  several  young  persons  had  removed,  under  the 
circumstances  named,  the  proprietors  in  meeting,  January, 
7th,  1705-6,  voted,  "  to  take  the  forfiture  of  all  the  lands  that 
was  given  to  Jos.  Gaylord,  Jun.,  Joseph  Hickox,  Abraham 
Andruss,  Jr.  and  Benjamin  Warner  that  they  cant  hold  by  the 
records."  But  the  lands  given  to  these  persons  proved  to  be 
beyond  the  reach  of  the  givers,  for  their  names  were  continued 
as  proprietors. 

The  proprietors'  profuse  liberality  in  giving  away  their 
lands  and  their  marked  partiality  for  those  who  dwelt  among 
them,  caused  no  complaint  and  no  remark,  so  long  as  the 
lands  had  little  value — so  long  as  it  was  difficult  to  induce  men 
to  take  them  and  improve  them.  But  circumstances  changed. 
It  was  found,  in  process  of  time,  that  in  some  parts  of  the 
town,  there  were  richer  lands  than  those  first  taken  up.     After 


118  HISTORY    OF   AVATERBUKT. 

the  peace  of  1713,  tlie  population  began  to  increase.  The 
prosj)ects  for  "real  estate"  materially  improved.  Then  it  was 
that  inquiries  began  to  be  made  into  the  doings  of  proprietors. 
Self  interest  quickened  the  sense  of  right  and  justice.  Those 
that  had  not  participated  in  the  grants  made,  saw  distinctly 
the  grievous  wrong  that  had  been  done.  Tliose  persons  that 
had  removed  from  the  town  found  that  the  proprietors  that 
remained  were  rapidly  stripping  them  of  their  estate,  passing 
it  over  to  others  without  consideration,  for  the  sole  purpose  of 
obtaining  permanent  settlers.  They  complained  as  men  would 
naturally  do.  They  disputed  the  legality  as  well  as  the  justice 
of  the  proceedings.  They  had  originally,  they  claimed,  an 
undivided  right  in  all  the  lands  of  Waterbury  which  they  had 
secured  by  purchase  and  deed,  which  right  had  been  put  be- 
yond a  doubt  by  the  town  patent.  What  they  had  fairly 
purchased  they  had  honestly  paid  for.  And  there  was  no 
equitable  or  lawful  mode,  they  contended,  by  which  this  com- 
mon property  could  be  disposed  of,  except  by  division  among 
the  proj^rietors  according  to  ownership.  A  majority, they  said, 
had  no  power  to  bind  the  minority,  except  in  case  of  equal 
distribution.  They  furthermore  complained  that  they  had  not 
been  warned  to  those  meetings  of  the  j^roprietors  which  had 
made  the  extraordinary  grants  complained  of.  I  copy  from  the 
records  Dea.  Stanley's  communication  protesting  against  the' 
obnoxious  grants.  There  is  pith  in  it,  when  the  crust  is  once 
penetrated  and  the  meaning  arrived  at : 

To  the  propriator  inhabitance  of  Waterbury  assembled  april  12-1715  breth- 
ren andnabours  I  the  subscriber  haueing  to  grate  disatisfaction  Obserued  the  .way 
of  your  giuing  or  granting  away  of  land  To  bring  in  inhabitance  according  to  an 
act  made  for  that  purpos  upon  record  desembr,  20 — 1697  which  hath  a  derect 
tendensy  to  uialate  and  destroy  and  conterary  to  right  ecquity  and  justis  or  any 
well  digested  reson  to  inuaid  the  property  of  the  first  purchesars  i  suppose  it  to 
be  a  truth  not  to  be  gainsayed  that  Those  that  were  the  first  purchesurs  of  the 
land  within  the  township  did  thereby  aquere  a  right  according  to  the  proportion 
of  what  payments  they  made  by  order  of  the  Comity  for  the  setling  of  the  place 
and  the  articles  they  fullfiUed  and  to  be  subdiuided  as  is  at  large  comprised  in  the 
pattin  [patent]  to  the  then  propriator  inhabitanc  and  their  heirs.  I  liaue  no 
where  seen  that  the  antient  propriators  did  impower  the  mager  part  by  uoat  to 
giue  the  land  at  their  plesure — the  receiued  prinsiple  I  perceaue  if  I  mestake  not 
is  that  the  majer  parte  of  the  propriators  in  comon  may  by  uoat  when  aposed  by 
the  miner  giue  away  from  the  miner  when  and  as  they  pleas — that  which  is  con- 
sequent upon  it  is  that  the  majer  may  combien  and  giue  it  all  to  and  amongst  them 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY.  119 

selves  so  that  the  miner  shall  haue  nither  land  nor  comonig  [commoning]  *  * 
*  *  *  for  my  own  part  to  my  best  remembrance  I  haue  neuer  been  warned 
to  any  propriatory  meeting  or  at  the  making  s-^  act  in  1697  besure  I  was  not  there 
to  my  knowlidge — others  haue  not  been  warned  as  they  haue  told  [me]  but  upon 
the  whole  i  take  this  opertunity  to  declare  and  protest  aganst  the  propriators 
proseding  any  father  in  gluing  [or]  granting  any  more  in  [accordance]  with  sd 
act  to  any  purticolure  person  or  persons  and  also  i  do  protest  aganst  all  the  grants 
that  haue  been  made  according  to  sd  act  to  make  propriator  inhabitance — i  haue 
here  unto  sett  my  hand  as  one  of  the  patentese  and  one  of  the  first  propriators 
and  were  posesed  of  one  hundred  pound  right  of  my  own  and  by  distrbution  of 
John  [newel's]  estate  all  his  rigiit  in  the  outlands  fell  to  me — pray  let  there  be  no 
strife  between  us  [&c]. 

John  Standley 
witness 

Jeremiah  peck 
Tliomas  Clark. 

At  the  same  •  meetin<:;  at  wliieli  John  Stanley's  protest  was 
presented,  tlie  proprietors,  as  if  to  fortify  themselves  in  what 
they  had  done,  and  to  make  sure  the  grants,  passed  a  vote 
which  is  recorded  as  follows  : 

It  was  inacted  by  voat  that  the  land  formerly  giuen  to  the  bacheldors*  shall  be 
ther  one  [own]  exsepting  thos  that  haue  not  fulltild  the  conditions  nor  like  to 
fulfill  them 

We  agree  that  all  the  grants  of  land  formerly  giuen  by  the  town  and  propria- 
tors shall  stand  good 

At  the  same  time  that  this  confirmatory  act  was  passed, 
another,  quite  remarkable  in  some  of  its  particulars,  was 
voted.  It  appears  to  have  been  aimed  at  the  bachelors.  It 
attempted  to  break  faith  with  them  by  cutting  them  off  from 
future  divisions  of  land ;  and  must  have  been  without  any 
binding  force.  On  account  of  its  objectionable  features,  the 
act  was  repealed  in  the  following  December.  At  the  same 
time,  a  division  of  land  was  agreed  upon,  in  Avhich  each  orig- 
inal proprietor  having  a  £100  right  was  to  have  eighty  acres 
and  others  in  proportion,  and  each  bachelor  proprietor  thirty 
acres.     Eight  acres  of  it  might  be  taken  up  in  the  sequester- 


*  The  reader  will  understand  that  the  bachelor  proprietors  were  not  all  literal  bachelors. 
They  were  men  of  different  ages,  married  and  unmarried,  who  applied  for  the  privileges  grant- 
ed in  the  acts  of  1697  nnd  1702-3  and  were  accepted  by  the  proprietors.  They  were,  how- 
ever, all  what  may  be  called  young  men,  though  a  few  may  have  been  over  thirty.  In  a  few  in- 
stances, persons  under  twenty-one  years  of  age  were  admitted  as  bachelor  proprietors  with  the 
understanding  that  they  were  to  have  five  years  after  they  came  of  age  to  fulfill  the  condi- 
tions. 


120 


IIISTOEY    OF   WATEKBUKY. 


ed  land.  The  lot  appears  to  have  been  drawn  Dee.  15th,  1715, 
and  as  a  pacifying  measnre,  apparently,  "  it  was  agreed  that 
Dea.  John  Stanley*  should  have  the  first  lot  for  John  Newel's 
lot,"  of  which  he  was  the  owner.  John  Southmayd,  as  a  com- 
pliment, w^as  to  have  the  second  lot.  There  are,  on  the  list  of 
1715,  thirty-six  original  and  fifty -two  bachelor  proprietors. 

A  propritors  meting  in  Waterbury  desmbr  the  20  1716  and  it  was  acted  by 
voat  that  the  yong  propriators  shall  be  recorded  in  the  2  cond  book  of  records 
with  the  prouisiall  or  conditions  that  the  propriators  laid  on  the  sd  bachelldor  elot- 
ments 

Dotr  Daniell  porter  and  Edman  Scott  did  protest  against  the  act  of  the  yong 
propriators  hauing  their  lands  Recorded  in  the  book  of  records 

Dr.  Porter  was  somewliat  in  the  way  of  protesting  in  pro- 
l^rietor's  meeting.  The  difiiculty  in  his  case  seems  to  have 
arisen  from  his  having  no  sons  yet  old  enough  to  be  admitted 
as  bachelor  proprietors.  He  had  therefore  not  been  benefited 
but  injured  by  the  proceedings  relating  to  them.  He  had 
afterwards,  however,  a  son  who  was  admitted. 

On  the  seventh  day  of  February,  1720-1,  a  committee  was 
appointed  "to  sarch  the  records  and  finde  out  what  bachelurs 
haue  fulfiled  articles  and  whoo  haue  not  fulfiled  articles  and 
macke  returns  to  the  propriators."  A  report  was  made  to  a 
meeting  held  the  next  day,  as  follows  : 


We  being  apointed  a  eoraety  to  macke  sarcli  to  finde  out  who  ware  admited  upon 
bachulders  acomedations  and  who  have  fufilled  the  condetions  to  macke  the  land 
theire  owne  and  who  have  not  fulfiled  the  articles — febeuary  8  1721 

Those  that  haue  fulfiled 


William  hikcox 
John  Gaylard 
Joseph  Gaylard 
John  worner  ser 
thomas  Richason 
John  Branson  ser 
Isarael  Richason 


Stephen  welltou 
Joseph  hikcox 
Robert  Scott 
John  Richason 
thomas  hikcox 
Richard  welton 
Benjamin  worner 


nathaniel  Richason 
thomas  Richards 

these  on  a 
gorg  scott  40    poun 

dauid  scott     Vpropriaty 
John  welton     when  we 

deuided 


*  Two  of  Dea.  Stanley's  sons,  John  Stanley,  Jr.  and  Samuel  Stanley,  appear  to  have  been  ad- 
mitted as  bachelor  proprietors  this  year,  their  names  appearing  in  the  division.  John  Stanley, 
Jr.,  lived  in  Farmington.  I  am  unable  to  find  thathe  ever  lived  in  Waterbury  after  his  fathers' 
removal  in  169j.  Samuel  Stanley  resided  in  Waterbury,  but  went  away  before  1715.  So  far  as 
it  appears,  neither  of  them  could  have  been  admitted  proprietors  in  accordance  with  the  votes 
of  1697  aud  1702-3,  and  neither  could  have  complied  with  the  conditions  of  those  votes.  I  sus- 
pect the  £40  proprieties  were  given  them  by  special  vote  and  unconditionally,  or  on  easy  con- 
ditions, for  the  purpose  of  removing  the  father's  discontentment. 


HISTOET    OF   WATEKBUKY. 


121 


Isaac  Brunson 
Eprim  worncr 
samuell  Stanndly 
Benjamin  Barns  jur 
thonias  welton 
Joseph  Brunson 
Stepen  ubson  jur 


Ebenezer  Riehason 
benjamin  Ricliards 
thomas  Barns 
Stephen  hopldns 
obediah  scott 
ebenezer  brunson 
thomas  clark 


Those  admited  that  haue  not  fulfiled  but  in  a  Hkely 

timothy  standly  ser 
timothy  hopkins 
gorg  scott  jur 
John  hikeox 


John  scouell 
Jonathan  scott  jur 
Jonn  standly  jur 
William  Judd 
daniell  porter  jur 
John  Judd 


samuell  scott 
thomas  ubson 


John  barns 
thonias  brunson 
Joseph  lewcs 
obediah  richards 
abraham  andrusjur 


thomas  andrus 
benjamin  worner  jur 
samuell  porter 
Ebenezer  hikeox 
John  Richards  jur 
gorg  welton 


Those  that  haue  not  fulfiled  as  we  Judg 


william  gaylord 
John  woi-ner  tailer 


Stephen  hikeox 
moses  brunson 


daniel     porter 
richard 


son     of 


Timothy  standly 

John  Hopkins      }■  coniety 

Thomas  Judd 

Atameating  of  the  propriators  of  waterbury  febeuary  8  1721  they  agre  by  uote 
to  axsepte  y«  return  of  the  comety  and  order  it  to  be  entered  upon  record 

Thus,  tliirty-eiglit  persons  were  reported  as  having  "ful- 
filed "  the  articles,  eighteen  as  "  in  a  likely  way  to  fulfil," 
and  five  as  having  "  not  fulfiled."  The  last,  of  course,  had 
forfeited  their  rights.  The  eighteen  who  were  "  in  a  likely 
way,"  were  yet,  I  conclude,  on  probation,  their  five  years  not 
having  expired.     They  all  finally  secured  their  rights. 

February  8th,  1720-1,  there  was  a  renewed  attempt  to  make 
a  considerable  addition  to  the  propriety  rights  of  the  old 
proprietors,  and  to  increase  their  proportional  interest  in  the 
undivided  lands,  thus  counteracting,  as  far  as  might  be,  what 
had  been  done  for  the  bachelors.  A  vote  was  passed  aug- 
menting the  proprieties  of  the  original  proprietors ;  but  they 
were  to  submit  to  the  conditions  of  the  acts  of  169T  and 
1702-3,  as  to  building,  &c. ;  and  what  their  sons  had  received 
was  to  go  towards  the  increase.  But  it  was  not  satisfactory 
on  account  of  the  restrictions,  and  a  year  afterwards  a  modi- 
fied vote  was  carried : 

February  28^^,  1721-2  It  was  agreed  upon  by  vote  that  where  as  an  Act  In 
February  8"",  1721  [altered  from  1720]  was  grevious  to  some  of  our  proprietors 


122  HISTOKY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

we  now  Further  Agree  that  Every  original  proprietor  or  propriety  Shall  have  two 
bacheldor  Lots  upon  an  hundred  pound  propriety  and  proportionally  upon  Greater 
and  lesser  proprietyes  with  what  was  Granted  Last  February  notwithstanding 
what  their  sons  have  had  which  bacheldor  Lott  Is  Looked  upon  to  be  now  68 
Acres  And  a  forty  pound  propriety  And  the  Obhgation  upon  those  Granted  In 
February  S""  1721  [altered  from  1720]  and  now  Granted  to  be  taken  ofi"  And  be 
free  from  Any  Incumberance  of  building  and  cohabiting.  And  the  Grant  to  the 
Bacheldors  that  were  admited  upon  a  forty  pound  propriety  that  they  Shall  have 
as  a  Division  of  fifty  five  Acres  to  Every  bacheldor  that  has  fuUfiUed  Articles  or 
In  Away  to  fullfill  articles  as  they  are  returned  by  A  Committ)'^  Appointed  for 
February  and  Recorded  in  the  old  proprietors  Book,  and  for  the  future  our  De- 
visions  shall  be  made  upon  Original  proprietors  with  the  addition  made  to  their 
propriet}^  and  upon  bacheldor  proprietors  According  to  their  propriety  And  It  is 
the  true  Intent  and  meaning  of  the  proprietors  In  this  act  and  Shall  be  so  taken 
and  Explained  that  Every  original  propriety  of  one  hundred  pound  shall  have  two 
bacheldor  proprietyes  and  no  more  and  so  proportionably  for  Greater  or  Lesser 
proprieties  and  that  all  Devisions  of  all  our  Lands  after  this  shall  be  made  upon  the 
present  original  proprietors  and  bacheldor  proprietors  that  are  already  made 

Eacli  original  proprietor  of  £100  obtained  by  this  act  an 
immediate  addition  to  liis  propriety  of  two  bachelor  accommo- 
dations, amounting  to  £80,  carrying  with  them  the  divisions 
which  had  already  been  made  to  the  bachelors.  Others  were 
favored,  in  like  manner,  according  to  their  existing  interests, 
the  addition  being  always  eighty  per  cent,  of  the  original  pro- 
priety. Thenceforth,  the  vote  declared,  lands  should  be  dis- 
posed of  by  division  and  the  divisions  shoidd  be  according  to 
interest.  Thus  the  system  of  unequal  distribution  and  special 
grants,  with  its  abuses,  was  put  an  end  to. 

By  far  the  largest  proportion  of  the  bachelor  proprietors 
were  sons  of  the  original  proprietors.  About  nine  were  grand- 
sons. The  remainder,  two  only,  Joseph  Lewis  and  Thomas 
Clark,  came  from  other  towns.  The  last  was  the  adopted  son 
of  Timothy  Stanley.  Nearly  one  quarter  of  them  were  made 
proprietors,  in  1699  ;  more  than  one  third  in  1715,  and  the  re- 
mainder, with  two  or  three  exceptions,  between  these  periods. 

The  proprietors  agreed,  Nov.  27th,  1722,  that  there  should 
be  reserved,  "  for  the  use  of  the  proprietors,"  six  propriety 
lots,  or  rights,  of  £40  each.  They  were  reserved  to  meet  such 
contingencies  as  might  naturally  be  expected  to  arise.  It  was 
determined  that  they  should  have  all  the  divisions  which  had 
already  been  made  on  the  bachelor  lots,  except  "  the  eight  acres 
n  sequester,"  and  all  the  future  divisions.     On  the  28th  of 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURT.  123 

Nov.  1722,  one  of  these  lots  was  granted  to  Moses  Bronson. 
It  was  the  fifth  propriety  k)t,  so  called,  and  had  been  formerly 
giv^en  to  Bronson  and  forfeited.  At  the  same  time,  the  fourth 
propriety  lot,  (which  had  belonged  to  Daniel  Porter,  the  son  of 
Richard,  and  been  forfeited  by  him,)  was  granted  to  John  War- 
ner, son  of  Ephraim,  and  William  Scott.  The  other  four  lots, 
the  first,  second,  third,  and  sixth,  were  ordered,  Nov.  29th,  IT:  6, 
to  be  sold,  and  the  money  reserved  for  bnilding  a  new  meeting 
honse.  They  broiiglit  £202.  These  six  lots  were  always  en- 
tered, in  the  record,  by  tlieir  numbers.  To  the  fourth  and  fifth 
were  added  the  names  of  the  grantees  or  owners — tlius,  "5th 
Propriety  Lott,  Moses  Bronson,"  &c. 

There  were  some  persons  who  were  accepted  as  bachelor 
proprietors,  who  did  not  comply  with  the  conditions  and  who 
therefore  forfeited  their  rights.  I  give  their  names.  William 
Gaylord,  John  Warner,  "  tailor,"*  Stephen  Hickox,  Daniel 
Porter,  son  of  Richard,  Zachariah  Baldwin,  Jr.,  of  Milford,f 
Obadiah  Scovill,  Samuel  Warner  and  Moses  Bronson,  (after- 
wards re-admitted.) 

There  were  in  the  end,  six  forfeited  propriety  lots  that  re- 
mained in  the  hands  of  the  proprietors.  These  were  the  six 
tliat  were  reserved,  in  1622,  "  for  the  use  of  the  proprietors." 

On  the  twenty'-eighth  day  of  November,  1722,  a  list  was 
made  out  for  the  purpose  of  a  land  division,  containing  the 
names  of  the  original  and  bachelor  proprietors.  It  is  the  first 
complete  list  to  be  found  on  record.  We  find  here  thirty-six 
original  and  fifty-seven  bachelor  proprietors,  the  first  having, 
unitedly,  £3,165,  and  the  last,  £2,280,  propriety.  If  we  add 
to  these  the  six  propriety  lots  of  £10  each,  the  school  lot 
of  £150   and  the  ministry  lot  of  £150,  granted  in  1715,  we 


*  On  the  eleventh  of  March,  1743-6,  Ebenezer  Warner,  3d,  and  George  Nichols  petitioned  the 
proprietors  for  the  bachelor  right  of  John  Warner  (tailor)  which  they  claimed  to  have  pur- 
chased. The  petition  was  addressed  "  To  the  worshipful!  Moderator  and  Gentlemen  Proprie- 
tors." The  petitioners  laid  claim  to  all  the  lands  laid  out  on  Warner's  lot— the  thirty-eight 
acres  at  the  date  of  his  acceptance  (1701) — the  thirty  acres  of  1715 — the  fifty-five  acres  of  1721-2 
— the  forty  acres  of  1723 — the  forty  acres  of  1727 — the  thirty  acres  of  1738-9 — "  the  sixteen 
acres  and  twenty  rods  in  the  village  soon  after  ;  in  the  whole  amounting  to  two  hundred  and 
forty-nine  acres  and  twenty  rods."    The  meeting  voted  "  not  to  do  anything." 

t  Baldwin  was  accepted  in  1710,  but  in  1713,  he  sold  all  his  right  and  title  of  lands  in  Wa- 
terbury  with  his  hachelor propriety  and  all  the  improvements  which  he  had  made  "  with  the 
building  and  other  timber,"  to  George  Scott,  and  returned  to  Milford. 


124  HISTOKY    OF   WATERBUEY. 

have  a  total  of  £5,985.  To  this  sum  must  be  addedthe  increase 
of  the  old  proprietor  and  school  allotments,  amounting  to 
eighty  per  cent.  (The  new  ministry  lot  did  not  have  the 
bachelor  addition.)  Add  this  increase  (£2,652)  to  the  former 
total,  (£5,985,)  and  we  have  a  grand  total  of  £8,637.  On  this 
amount,  all  the  divisions  of  land  were  made  in  1722  and 
afterwards. 

If  we  compare  the  list  of  original  proprietors  of  1722  with 
that  of  1688,  we  shall  observe  several  changes  of  names  and 
a  few  additions.  Capt.  Thomas  Judd,  Wm.  (meaning  the 
son  of  William)  stands  in  the  j)lace  of  Smith  Judd,  as  he 
was  at  first  called.  Thomas  Judd,  Jones,  is  substituted  for 
Benjamin  Jones.  John  Judd  occupies  the  place  of  Ensign 
Judd.  Joseph  Ilickox,  John  Richards  and  Jonathan  Scott  stand 
in  the  places  of  Mr.  Frayser,  Robert  Porter  and  Samuel  Scott. 
Abraham  Andruss,  cooper,  is  written  for  Abraham  Andruss, 
Jr.,  the  elder  Andruss  now  having  a  son  who  was  a  bachelor 
proprietor.  Mr.  Jeremiah  Peck  and  John  Southmayd  are  new 
names.  "  Timothy  Stanley,  original,"  is  thus  written  to  dis- 
tinguish his  original  from  his  bachelor  propriety.  With  these 
exceptions,  the  names  are  the  same  as  in  1688. 

Of  the  fifty-seven  bachelor  proprietors  on  the  catalogue  of 
1722,  the  name  of  one,  that  of  John  Stanley,  Jr.,*  is  sometimes 
omitted.  The  whole  number  of  proprietors,  original  and  bach- 
elor, counting  Stanley,  Jr.,  is  ninety-three.  Adding  the  six 
propriety  lots,  the  school  lot  and  the  ministry  lot  of  1715,  and 
we  have  one  hundred  and  one  proprieties  entitled  to  land 
divisions. 

I  copy  below  the  list  of  iSTov.,  1722,  adding  to  the  name  of 
each  proprietor  the  amount  of  his  propriety  before  and  after 
the  bachelor  addition. 


*"  [March  111733-31}  It  was  by  vote  Agreed  and  Concluded  that  they  [the  proprietors] 
Look  upon  John  Standlies  Jur  Right  to  be  Good  to  a  Bacheldor  Lott  and  he  ought  to  have  a  note 
for  his  Land  to  be  laid  out  and  he  Engaged  that  the  Proprietors  might  have  the  Eight  acres  In  the 
Sequester  to  be  Disposed  by  them  as  they  See  Cause." 

In  March,  1757,  the  proprietors  again  passed  a  vote  in  favor  of  John  Stanley,  Jr's  right  and 
directed  his  name  to  be  added  to  the  list  of  proprietors. 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBURY. 


125 


ORIGINAL      PROPRIETORS. 


Abraham  Andniss,  Sen., 
Abraham  Andruss,  Cooixt 
Benjamin  Barns,  Sen., 
Isaac  Bronson,  Sen., 
John  Bronson,  Sen., 
John  Carrington, 
Joseph  Gaylord,  Sen., 
Thomas  Hancox, 
Joseph  Hickox,  Son., 
Samuel  Hickox,  Sen., 
Lieut.  John  Hopkins, 
John  Judd,  Son., 
Philip  Judd, 

('apt.  Thomas  Judd,  Wm. 
Thomas  Judd,  Jones, 
Thomas  Judd,  Jr., 
John  Newell, 
Thomas  Newell, 
Mr.  JerQmiah  Peck, 
Daniel  Porter,  Sen., 


£  80 

£144 

,  10<> 

180 

loo 

180 

loo 

180 

80 

144 

GO 

1U8 

80 

144 

100 

180 

GO 

108 

loo 

180 

loo 

180 

loo 

180 

80 

144 

100 

180 

100 

180 

loo 

180 

100 

180 

90 

162 

150 

270 

95 

171 

Richard  Porter, 
John  Richards,  Sen., 
Obadiah  Richards,  Sen., 
Thomas  Riohason, 
Edmund  Scott,  Sen., 
Edmund  Scott,  Jr., 
Jonathan  Scott,  Sen., 
Sohn  Scovill,  Sen., 
John  Southmayd, 
John  Stanley,  Sen., 
Timothy  Stanley,  original, 
Stephen  Upson,  Son., 
Daniel  Warner, 
John  Warner,  Son., 
Thomas  Warner, 
John  Wclton,  Sen., 


A  Great  Lot  for  Schools,       150 
A  Great  Lott  for  the  Ministry,  150 


en 

60 

90 

80 

144 

80 

144 

50 

90 

100 

180 

70 

126 

50 

90 

80 

144 

150 

270 

loo 

180 

loo 

180 

50 

90 

GO 

180 

90 

162 

100 

180 

80 

144 

Bachelor  Proprietors,  each  having  £40  propriety  : 


Abraham  Andruss,  Jr. 

Thomas  Andruss, 

Benjamin  Barnes,  Jr., 

John  Barnes, 

Thomas  Barnes, 

Ebeuezer  Bronson, 

Isaac  Bronson,  Jr., 

John  Bronson,  son  of  Isaac, 

Joseph  Bronson, 

Thomas  Bronson, 

Thomas  Clark, 

John  Gaylord, 

Joseph  Gaylord,  Jr., 

Ebenezer  Hickox, 

John  Hickox, 

Joseph  Hickox, 

Thomas  Hickox, 


William  Hickox, 
Timothy  Hopkins, 
Stephen  Hopkins, 
John  Judd,  Jr., 
William  Judd,* 
Joseph  Lewis, 

Daniel  Porter,  son  of  Daniel 
Samuel  Porter, 
Benjamin  Richards, 
John  Richards,  Jr., 
Obadiah  Richards,  Jr., 
Thomas  Richards,  Sen., 
Ebenezer  Richason, 
Israel  Richason, 
John  Richason, 
Nathaniel  Richason, 
Thomas  Richason,  Jr., 


*  William  Judd,  after  172-2,  is  generally  "  William  Judd,  bach,  lott,"  to  distinguish  him  proba- 
bly, from  the  original  subscriber  by  that  name  who  forfeited  and  who  was  his  grandfather. 


126  HISTOEY    OF    WATEEBUKY. 

David  Scott,  Samuel  Warner,  son  of  Thomas, 

George  Scott,  Sen.,  George  Welton, 

George  Scott,  Jr.,  John  WeUon,  Jr., 

Jonathan  Scott,  Jr.,  Richard  Welton, 

Obadiah  Scott,  Stephen  Welton, 

Robert  Scott,  Thomas  Welton, 

Samuel  Scott, 

John  Scovill,  Jr.,  1"  Propriety  Lot, 

John  Stanley,  Jr.,  .                         2''    Tropriety  Lot, 

Samuel  Stanley,  S-^    Propriety  Lot, 

Lieut.  Timothy  Stanley,  bachelor  lot,        4""  Propriety  Lot, 

Stephen  Upson,  Jr.,  John  Warner, 


Thomas  LTpson,  William  Scott, 

Benjamin  Warner,  Sen.,  5'^  Propriety  Lot,        i 

Benjamin  W^arner,  Jr.,  Moses   Bronson,f  J 

Ephraim  Warner,  6      Propriety  Lot. 
John  Warner,  Sen.,*  bachelor  lot, 

In  the  early  history  of  Waterbiiry,  the  town,  for  conven- 
ience, was  divided  in  four  sections.  That  part  of  it  lying 
east  of  the  Xaugatuck  Kiver  and  north  of  the  Farmington 
road  was  the  northeast  quarter.  That  part  situated  east  of 
the  river  and  south  of  said  road  was  the  south  east  quarter. 
Of  the  territory  west  of  the  river,  that  which  lay  north  of  the 
Woodbury  road  was  the  northwest  quarter,  and  that  south 
of  said  road  was  the  southwest  quarter.  When  deeds  were 
given,  the  quarter  in  which  the  land  lay  was  usually  named. 
There  was  a  land  measurer  for  each  quarter,  whose  duty  it 
was  to  lay  out  the  land  within  his  territory.  When  a  lot  was 
drawn  for  a  division,  a  certificate  or  "  note  "  was  given  by  the 
town  clerk  to  each  proprietor  or  claimant,  directed  to  the 
town  measurer,  authorizing  him  to  lay  out  on  a  certain  pro- 
priety right  and  to  the  person  to  whom  it  was  given,  the 
agreed  number  of  acres.  These  "notes"  were  written  on 
small  pieces  of  paper  from  three  to  four  inches  square,  several 
of  which  are  now  in  my  possession ;  some  of  them  dating  as 
far  back  as  1723.  When  a  piece  of  land  was  found  which 
suited  the  holder,  which  was  often  not  till  the  lapse  of  many 
years,  he  got  it  measured  and  indorsed  upon  the  paper.    There 

*  John  Warner,  Sen.  bachelor  lot— The  Sen.  is  intended  to  distinguish  him  from  "John  War- 
ner, tailor,"  (son  of  Thomas,)  who  had  been  made  a  bachelor  and  forfeited.  The  bachelor  lot 
characterizes  the  lot  as  distinct  from  the  original  propriety  of  his  father,  which  is  also  written 
John  Warner,  Sen. 

+  This  name  is  omitted  in  the  subsequent  lists. 


HISTORY   OF   WATEKBUEY.  127 

must  be  many  of  these  certificates,  given  for  the  later  hind  di- 
visions, still  ontstanding  and  still  nnsatisfied. 

After  1722,  the  land  divisions  were  freqnent.  In  1723,  one 
acre  on  £1  was  distributed,  (or  a  "  note  "  given  for  it ;)  in 
1727,  one  acre  ;  in  1730,  forty  acres,  one  rood,  and  ten  rods 
on  £100,  in  the  "north  west  quarter;"  in  1738-9,  one  quarter 
of  one  acre  on  £1 ;  in  1747-8,  one  quarter  of  an  acre  ;  in  1751, 
one  half  an  acre  ;  in  1759,  one  half  an  acre  on  £1,  and  five 
acres  "in  sequester"  on  £100;  in  1780,  one  quarter  of  an 
acre  on  £1,  and  two  and  a  half  acres  on  £100  "  in  sequester  ;" 
in  1792,  one  half  an  acre  on  £1,  and  two  and  a  half  acres  on 
£100 ;  in  1802,  one  quarter  of  an  acre  on  £1.  Up  to  171:5, 
there  had  been  two  hundred  and  forty-nine  acres  and  twenty 
rods  distributed  on  each  bachelor  propriety.  In  1780,  the 
number  had  been  increased  to  four  hundred  and  eleven  acres 
and  twenty  rods.  From  this,  an  approximate  estimate  may  be 
made  of  the  quantity  of  land  received,  in  the  same  time,  by 
each  original  proprietor,  or  his  representatives. 

Before  the  incorporation  of  the  town,  the  land  grants  made 
by  the  proprietors  appear  to  have  been  ratified  by  the  grand 
committee.  Any  want  of  formality  on  the  part  of  the  pro- 
prietors would,  I  suppose,  have  been  corrected  by  this  subse- 
(pient  ratification.  But  after  Mattatuck  was  made  a  town, 
things  were  changed.  The  forms  of  law  must  be  observed,  in 
order  that  the  titles  to  lands  obtained  by  grant  or  division 
sliould  be  valid.  These  lands  were  parceled  out  at  public 
meetings.  Tliese  meetings  are  called,  in  the  records,  some- 
times town  meetings,  at  other  times  proprietors'  meetings, 
(as  will  be  observed  from  the  record-extracts  which  have 
been  made  from  time  to  time.)  All  the  inhabitants  of  the 
place  took  part  in  them.  So  long  as  all  who  were  of  a  proper 
age  to  act  were  proprietors,  as  they  were  for  a  considerable 
time  after  the  settlement  was  begun,  the  evil  might  not  be  se- 
rious of  a  town  meeting,  so  called,  undertaking  to  transact 
proprietors'  business.  But,  after  a  time,  the  case  was  ditfer- 
ent.  Individuals  began  to  make  their  appearance  who  owned 
no  right  in  the  undivided  lands.  At  first,  these  were  the 
grown  up  sons  of  proprietors.  They  all  met  in  town  meetings 
and  voted,  not  only  on  the  questions  which  concerned  the 


128  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 

the  town  alone,  but  on  those  which  related  to  the  proprietors 
alone.  Such  questions  were  determined  by  a  major  vote. 
!No  regard  was  had  to  the  inequality  of  rights.  He  who 
owned  £50  propriety  had  one  vote,  he  who  owned  £100  had 
but  one,  and  he  wdio  owned  nothing  had  one.  After  the  with- 
drawal of  the  committee,  there  was  no  power  at  hand  to  ratify 
proceedings  and  correct  mistakes.  How  long  these  irregulari- 
ties were  continued,  I  am  not  quite  sure  ;  but  there  appears 
to  have  been  no  separate  record  of  town  meetings  kept  till 
December,  1698.  And  for  many  years  afterwards,  down  cer- 
tainly to  1T13,  these  meetings  occasionally  granted  lands,  &c. 
At  length,  tlie  error  became  manifest,  and  evil  results  were 
apprehended.  Men  perceived  that  they  held  their  lands  by 
an  insecure  tenure.  The  validity  of  claims  based  on  town 
grants  and  town  action  was  denied.  The  best  interests  of  so- 
ciety— those  interests  connected  with  the  security  of  landed 
property — were  put  in  jeopardy.  The  people  of  Waterbury 
were  not  alone  in  their  embarrassment.  Other  towns  had  un- 
consciously fallen  into  the  same  error.  In  some  instances, 
proprietors  attempted  to  correct  the  mistake  by  ratifying  what 
the  towns  had  done.  It  would  not  do,  however,  and  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly  was  at  length  called  on  to  interpose.  At  the 
May  session,  1723,  an  act  was  passed  validating  "  all  grants, 
divisions,  or  dispositions  of  common  lands  made  according  to 
ancient  custom  in  town  meetings,"  whether  made  before,  or 
after,  the  towns  were  incorporated.  It  was,  at  the  same  time, 
enacted,  "that  no  person  whatsoever  by  becoming  an  inhabit- 
ant of  a  town,  or  by  any  other  means  against  or  without  the 
consent  of  such  proprietors,  shall  be  taken  or  esteemed  to  have 
any  estate,  title,  right,  or  interest "  in  the  common  or  undi- 
vided lands  of  any  towns.  It  was  also  enacted,  that  the  pro- 
prietors, in  their  meetings,  should  "  have  full  power,  by  their 
major  votes,  to  be  reconed  according  to  their  interest  in  the 
common  land,  to  regulate,  improve,  manage,  and  divide  such 
common  land,  in  such  manner  and  proportion  as  they  shall  see 
good." 


?-^in<'--ni  zcayner-: 


9 


fo^^r'^'-^y^e/af^  ^m.y^  ftopiw^:^^.^ 


XSv^:^.^^ 


\ 


-:«4A. 


^t 


HISTOKY    OF   WATERURY.  129 


CHAPTER    XL 


PERSONAL  NOTICES  OF  THE  FIRST  SETTLERS  OF  WATERBURY. 

Of  the  tliirty-four  proprietors  of  Waterbiiry,  who  became 
settlers  before  16SS,  all,  except  four,  were  from  Farming-ton. 
Abraham  Andriiss,  Sen.,  was  from  Fairfield,  Joseph  Gaylord 
was  oi-iginally  from  Windsor,  John  Hopkins  from  Hartford 

and  Benjamin  Jones  from  ,     They  were  all  farmers. 

Some  of  them  had  trades — such  as  are  in  most  demand  in  new 
settlements — to  which  they  devoted  a  part  of  their  time,  par- 
ticularly when  the  weather  was  unfavorable  for  farm  work. 
There  were  among  them  a  few  men  of  substance  ;  but  gener- 
ally they  were  in  moderate  circumstances.  Xone  was  rich, 
none  very  poor.  All  labored  with  their  hands.  As  to  family 
and  station,  they  were  from  the  great  "  middle  class '' — that 
which  lies  at^the  foundation  of  society  and  which  perpetuates 
the_r3£g.-J^  Several  were  honorably,  or  rather  respectably^ ' 
connected,  but  there  were  no  patrician  families.  ISTot  one  of 
them  bore  a  name  which  was  particularly  distinguished  in  the 
early  history  of  the  colonies,  with  the  exception  of  Hopkins, 
the  town  miller;  and  he  is  not  known  to  have  been  a  relation 
of  Gov.  Hopkins.  I  have  not  succeeded  very  well  in  tracing 
their  origin.  Farther  investigations  will  discover  more  facts^ 
undoubtedly;  but  I  have  rarely  been  able  to  track  them,  in  the 
ascending  line,  beyond  Hartford,  or  the  old  towns  of  Connec- 
ticut.    "\Ve  may  rest  assured,  however,  that  they  had  an  anti- 

*  Mr.  Ilollister,  in  his  History  of  Connecticut,  (Vol.  I,  Chapter  XX,)  has  taken  some  pains 
to  show  that  the  early  planters  of  the  Colony  were  of  good  descent  and  belonged  to  the  better 
classes  of  the  English  people.  In  a  certain  sense  I  admit  this.  But  it  should  be  remembered  that 
no  other  classes  leave  a  permanent  posterity.  The  vile,  the  dissolute,  the  infirm,  the  thrift- 
less, those  of  mean  endowments,  mental  and  bodily,  die  out  by  a  natural  law,  leaving  few  im- 
mediate and  no  remote  descendants.  They  perish  from  want,  violence  and  internal  rottenness. 
Their  numbers  are  kept  good  only  by  accessions  from  without.  Coming  in  contact  with  a 
stronger  and  better  race,  they  are  overrun  and  disappear.  And  it  is  well  for  humanity  that 
it  is  so.  Thus,  by  an  invincible  law  of  nature,  "  the  better  classes,"— not  the  "  landed  gentry  "  ne. 
cessarily — but  those  of  sound  mental,  moral  and  bodily  constitution — become  the  true  and  only 
progenitors  of  a   people.    Thus,  virtue  conquers  vice,  and  strength  overcomes  weakness. 


130  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY. 

quity,  and  a  very  hoary  one  too.  I  have  not  consulted  books 
of  heraldry,  partly,  if  you  please,  because  I  expected  to  make 
no  discoveries  in  that  quarter.  I  do  not  suppose  the  ancestors 
of  the  Judds,  tlie  Hickoxes,  the  Bronsons  and  the  Weltons 
ever  "bore  arms;"  and  if  the  fact  were  otherwise,  it  would  not 
make  an  unworthy  descendant  respectable.  It  would  not  save 
him  from  the  pillory,  or  the  halter.  Those  who  are  ambitious 
for  coats  of  arms,  may  find  them  in  ISTew  York,  on  sale,  cheaper 
than  broadcloth.* 
jT^^t  an  early  period,  there  was  a  law  of  the  colony  requiring 
\  marriages,  births  and  deaths  to  be  recorded  by  the  town  clerk, 
■with  penalties  for  neglect  or  delajj  This  law,  however,  seems 
to  have  been  very  imp'eiTectly  observed  in  Waterbury.  Dur- 
ing John  Stanley's  clerkship,  no  record  of  these  things  was 
kept,  or  at  least,  none  has  been  preserved.  The  only  item  of 
the  kind  entered  by  him,  is  the  birth  of  his  son  Timothy,  in 
1689.  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  was  made  register  in  1696,  and  in 
1699,  he  appears  to  have  commenced  a  record  of  marriages, 
births  and  deaths,  and  made  it  retrospective  to  some  extent. 
If  the  male  head  of  a  family  was  then  living  in  Waterbury,  he, 
in  some  cases,  gave  an  account  of  his  children  born  in  the 
town,  with  the  date,  and  in  a  few  instances  of  those  born  be- 
fore he  joined  the  settlement.  Thus,  in  the  case  of  Abraham 
Andruss,  Sen's  children,  the  record  begins  with  the  birth, 
(place  not  mentioned)  of  the  first  child,  in  1672;  while  in  the 
instance  of  Isaac  Bronson's  children,  it  commences  with  the 
fourth  child,  being  the  first  born  in  Waterbury,  in  1680.  It  is 
impossible  to  discover  from  written  evidence,  the  date  of  the 
first  birth  from  European  parents  that  occurred  in  the  town; 
but  the  first  registered  birth  was  that  of  Rebecca,  daughter  of 
Thomas  and  Mary  Eichason,  April  27,  1679.  She  m.  John 
Warner,  son  of  John,  afterwards  a  deacon  of  the  Westbury 
church.    Richard,  son  of  John  and  Mary  Welton,  registered  by 


*  Since  the  above  wns  written,  I  hare  looked  into  Burke's  Encyclopedia  of  Heraldry,  (Lend., 
1844.)  I  find  there  the  following  names,  (to  wit :)  Andrews,  Barnes,  Branson,  or  Braunson, 
Carrington,  Clark,  Hancock,  Hiccox,  Hopkins,  Jones,  Judd,  Lewis,  Newell,  Peck,  Porter,  Rich- 
ards, Richardson,  Scott,  Southmead,  Stanley,  Upton,  Walton,  Warner. 

Any  one  who  is  interested  in  this  information  and  is  out  at  the  elbows  can  pursue  the  inquiry. 
It  may  be  he  will  find  something  that  will  fit  him — a  "  coat  "  on  which  are  blazoned  his  for- 
gotten, and  with  which  he  may  cover  his  dishonored,  "  arms." 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBURY.  131 

Mr.  Southmayd,  Wcas  born  "  sometime  in  March,  1680."  If  this 
date  is  intended  for  1680,  7iew  sUjle^  as  it  probably  is,  Eicliard 
Welton  may  be  regarded,  till  evidence  to  the  contrary  is 
shown,  as  the  first  male  child  born  in  the  Nangatnck  Valley, 
above  Derby.  Family  tradition  concurs  with  the  indications 
of  the  record. 

Marriages  in  olden  tiines  w^ere  celebrated  by  the  governor,         "*") 
deputy ^^vernorj_  assistants,   or   commissioners.     Clergymen  ^ 

rarely  performed  the  ceremony  before  1700.  Baptisms  took 
place  a  few  days  after  birth ;  sometimes,  when  a  magistrate  or 
minister  lived  in  the  village,  "  immediately  after,"  as  the  old 
record  saitli. 

Until  1666,  wills  were  probated  and  estates  settled  in  the 
Court  of  Magistrates.  At  this  date,  the  several  counties,  four 
in  number,  were  established,  and  this  business  was  given  to  the 
County  courts.  It  was  continued  in  these  courts  till  the  coun- 
ties were  divided  into  probate  districts.  Waterljury  at  first 
belonged_to_IIartford  County,  and  its  probate  business  was  (...■ 
done  in  jthe  County  Court  of  Hartford  till  1719.  At  tliis  / 
period  the  town  was  anxexed  to  the  district  of  Woodbury.  It 
thus  continued  till  1779,  when  the  Waterbury  District  was  es- 
tablished.  On  the  probate  record  of  Hartford,  Woodbury 
and  Waterbury,  I  have  been  obliged  to  rely  for  many  facts 
relating  to  the  early  settlers  of  Waterbury. 

ABRAHAM  ANDRUSS,  Sex. 

The  name  is  usually  spelled  Andrews,  though  rarely  or  never 
on  our  record.  He  was  the  son  of  Thomas  Andrews,  who  re- 
moved from  Plartford  to  Bankside,  in  Fairfield,  and  who  had 
four  sons — John,  Abraham,  Jei'emiah  and  Thomas — and  six 
daughters.     His  will  bore  the  date  of  1662. 

Abraham  Andruss,  Sen.,  was  one  of  the  thirty  who  signed     'x 
the  articles  of  1674.     He  had  an  £80  propriety,  and  was  among 
the  earliest  settlers  of  Mattatuck.     His  name  is  on  all  the  lists       I 
of  those  who  had  early  divisions  of  fence.     He  and  Timothy 
Stanley  were  the  first  townsmen,  or  selectmen  of  the  town, 
they  being  spoken  of  as  holding  this  ofiice  in  1681.     He  sub-      / 
sequently  occupied  the  same  position  in  1690, 1692, 1706,  1707,     / 
1711,  1716.     He  was  town  surveyor  in  1700  and  afterwards^  y'' 


132  mSTORY    OF   WATEKBUEY. 

a  deputy  to  the  General  Court  at  the  May  session,  in  1712; 
one  of  the  signers  of  the  agreement  to  pay  Mr.  Peck  £60  per 
year,  in  16S9,  and  a  frequent  member  of  important  committees 
appointed  by  tlie  town  and  proprietors.  On  the  whole,  he  was 
a  man  of  considerable  note  among  the  first  settlers  of  AYater- 
bury. 

Andruss  had  a  *'  house  lot"  I^ov,,  1687,  at  the  west  end  of 
the  village,  near  where  the  late  Dr.  Buckley  lived.  It  was 
bounded  east  on  Jolm  Welton,  west  on  "  a  great  lot,"  (the  cor- 
ner lot.)  Nothing  is  said  of  a  house.  The  lot  was  convej'ed, 
April  18th,  1696,  to  David  Scott,  and  afterwards  to  Robert 
Scott,  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.  and  John  Southmayd.  There  is  no 
house  mentioned  in  any  of  the  conveyances. 

January  22"^  1680  [?]  the  town  granted  to  abrabam  andrus  senor  a  peic  of  land 
buting  on  y«  mill  Riuer  and  on  y«  common  fenc  aganst  s^  andruses  tbree  acre  lot 
prouided  it  do  not  pregedis  high  wayes  and  he  build  a  hous  or  set  up  a  tan  yard.* 

This  lot  was  recorded  in  1687,  as  four  acres,  and  is  described 
as  butting  north  on  the  common,  easterly  on  the  river,  south- 
erly on  the  common,  westerly  on  the  top  of  the  hill.  "  March 
10,  1701:,"  it  was  again  recorded,  and  is  mentioned  as  contain- 
ing 3^  acres,  with  a  dwelling  house,  "  butting  south  on  the  com- 
mon fence,  north  and  west  on  the  highway,  east  at  the  southeast 
corner  coming  to  the  river,  and  at  the  northeast  corner  falling 
four  rods  and  a  half  from  the  mill  river,  so  cattle  may  pass' 
safely  over  the  river."  It  was  situated  below  the  mill,  imme- 
diately below  the  present  bridge,  on  the  west  side  of  the  river, 
bounding  on  the  river  at  the  lower  corner,  and  falling  four  and 
a  half  rods  from  it,  next  the  road  which  came  from  the  village. 
From  the  fact  that  a  tan-yard  is  mentioned  in  the  original  grant, 
it  is  probable  that  Andruss  was  a  tanner. 

In  1717-8,  when  it  became  necessary  to  provide  for  declin- 
ing years,  Andruss  conveyed  to  his  youngest  son,  Thomas, 
lands,  &c.,  as  follows — (the  deed  is  signed  by  a  mark,  and  bears 
the  date  of  January  4th,  1717)  : 

*  But  few  of  the  land  titles  of  the  first  proprietors  of  Waterbury,  acquired  in  the  first  years  of 
the  settlement,  can  be  traced  to  specific  grants  from  the  Colony's  committee,  or  the  proprietors, 
or  to  land  divisions,  or  to  any  other  valid  source.  This  is  particularly  the  fact  with  the  house 
lots.  Those  of  the  present  generation  who  hold  the  lands  referred  to  must  rely  for  the  good- 
ness of  their  titles  on  the  validating  acts  of  the  Assembly. 


HISTOKY   OF   WATERBmiY.  133 

For  and  in  concediration  of  my  son  thomas  andrus  who  now  lives  with  me 
tacking  the  care  of  my  self  and  my  wife  while  we  live  unles  my  wife  should  be 
left  by  me  and  mary  again  and  finding  of  us  with  a  sutable  and  comfortable  main- 
tenance and  tacking  the  whole  care  of  us  both  while  we  live  both  in  sixnes  and  in 
helth  and  for  the  loue  and  good  will  which  I  do  bare  towards  my  son  thomas  *  * 
*  I  giue  him  the  whole  of  my  teame  and  all  the  tackling  there  unto  belonging 
both  of  Iron  and  wood  and  all  tools  that  I  have  that  is  nesary  to  carry  on  hus- 
bandry work  *  *  *  *  I  give  unto  my  son  thomas  all  the  lands  I  stand 
posest  of  within  the  bounds  of  Waterbury  with  the  bulding  fencing  orcharding 
thare  to  belonging  and  the  whole  of  my  propriety  in  the  undeuided  land  he  to 
tacke  posesion  of  the  one  half  now  and  the  other  half  at  my  deceas  [&c.] 

When  the  new  meeting  house  was  seated,  in  1729,  "  Good- 
man Andruss  and  his  wife "  were  placed  in  the  seat  next  the 
pulpit,  on  the  west  side,  opposite  the  minister,  this  high  posi- 
tion being  due  to  their  age  and  worth.  But  the  poor  man 
died  soon  after,  or  before  December  of  the  same  year,  he  being 
the  last  (who  settled  in  Waterbury)  of  the  original  thirty  sub- 
scribers. His  inventory,  taken  in  Dec,  1731,  amounted  to 
£36,  15s. 

Abraham  Andruss  married  Rebecca,  a  daughter  of  John 
Carrington,  also  an  original  proprietor.  Their  children  were  : — 

1.  Rebecca;  born  Dec.  16,  1672;  married  about  1696,  William  Hickox. 

2.  Mary;  b.  March  10,  1674-5;  m.  April,  1093,  Daniel  Warner,  son  of  Daniel 
Warner  of  Farmington. 

3.  Hannah  ;  b.  Sep.  8,  1678;  m.  "Zopher  Xorthrup." 

4.  Abraham ;  b.  Oct.  14,  1680.  He  was  admitted  as  a  bachelor  proprietor 
March  18,  1701 ;  m.  Nov.  5,  1702,  Hannah,  daughter  of  Thomas  Stephens  of  Mid- 
dletown,  by  whom  he  had  a  son  born  in  Waterbury,  Sep.  6,  17(i3.  He  had  a  house 
and  half  an  acre  and  twelve  rods  of  ground  in  Feb.  1702-3,  butted  on  all  sides  on 
highway,  and  situated,  apparently,  west  and  in  front  of  the  old  mill,  between 
"  Union  Square  "  and  the  Scovill  Manuf'g  Co's  rolling  mill.  He  remained,  how- 
ever, only  long  enough  to  secure  his  propriety  right.  March  12,  1705-6,  he  sold 
his  place  to  his  father,  and  received  in  payment  certain  lands  in  Farmington,  to 
which  town  he  had  already  removed.  He  had  five  children  born  there  between 
1705  and  1712.  Afterwards  he  turned  up  in  Saybrook,  where  he  was  denominated 
"  doctor."     He  was  there  in  1733. 

5.  Sarah  ;  b.  March  10,  1683-4  ;  m.  Joseph  Lewis,  and  d.  March  6,  1773. 

6.  Rachel;  b.  July  11,  1686  ;  m.  Samuel  Orvice. 

7.  John;  b.  July  16,  1688.  He  m.  Martha  Warner  and  removed  early  to  Far- 
mington, where  he  had  several  children.  He  was  there  in  1710,  1715,  1723,  and 
had  returned  to  Waterbury  in  1724,  where  his  seventh  and  eighth  children  were 
born — the  last  in  1728.  He  hved  in  the  southeast  quarter,  in  1730,  near  Judd's 
Meadow.     In  1748-9  he  was  an  inhabitant  of  Woodbury. 

8.  Thomas;  b.  "  March  6,  1694."  He  became  a  bachelor  proprietor  in  1715, 
and  married  Marv,  d.  of  John  Turner  of  Hartford,  Xov.  2,  1725,  bv  whom  he  had 


131  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUKY. 

three  daughters  born  in  Waterbury,  the  last  in  1734.  In  1731,  he  exchanged  with 
Stephen  Kelsey  his  house  and  hinds  for  a  house  and  sixty-nine  acres  on  the  Wood- 
bury road,  near  the  Woodbury  Une.  These  last  he  sold,  in  1735,  to  Thomas 
Mathews,  Jr.  of  Wallingford,  to  which  place  he  removed  soon  after. 

ABRAHAM  ANDRUSS,  Jr.,  or  Cooper. 

He  was  caWedJunio?'  because  he  was  younger  than  his  name- 
sake, the  term  in  those  days  having  no  reference  to  family 
relationship.  Tlie  term  cooper  designated  his  occupation.  He 
was  a  son  of  John  (and  Mary)  Andrews.  The  father  was  an 
early  settler  of  Farmington,  and  one  of  the  first  (and  non 
"  fulfilling  ")  signers  of  the  articles  for  the  settlement  of  Wa- 
terbury. He  had  seven  sons,  John,  Abraham,  Samuel,  Dan- 
iel, Joseph,  (who  signed  the  articles,  but  never  came  to  Water- 
bury,)  Stephen,  Benjamin,  and  three  daughters,  Mary,  (the 
mother  of  Benjamin  Barnes,)  Hannah,  (who  married  Obadiah 
Eichards,)  and  Kachel.  He  died  in  1681,  (his  wife  in  May, 
1694,)  leaving  legacies  to  several  of  his  grandchildren,  includ- 
ing John  and  Abraham  Andruss  and  John  Eichards. 

Abraham  Andruss,  Jr.,  or  cooper  Andruss,  (born  Oct.  31, 
1648,  baptized,  April  2d,  1654,)  had  a  £100  propriety  and 
subscribed  the  articles  "in  the  room  of  John  Judd."  His 
name  is  first  mentioned  in  the  allotment  of  the  fourth  division 
of  fence.  He  was  one  of  those  who  were  declared,  Feb,  6th, 
1682,  to  have  forfeited  their  rights.  On  promise  of  "  submis- 
sion and  reformation,"  however,  he  was  again  put  in  possession 
of  his  allotments.  His  name  is  on  the  list  of  proprietors  in 
1688,  and  on  all  subsequent  lists.  Nothing  in  particular  is 
known  of  his  standing.  His  house  and  a  house  lot  of  two 
acres  were  on  the  north  corner  of  West  Main  and  Bank  streets, 
butting  west  on  Daniel  Porter  and  south  on  common  land. 
He  married  Sarah,  a  daughter  of  Eobert  Porter.  They  both 
joined  the  church  in  Farmington,  Jan.  3d,  1686.  He  died 
May  3d,  1693,  leaving  his  widow  pregnant.  His  inventory 
amounted  to£lT7, 17s.  3d.;  and  the  estate  was  distributed,  March 
20th,  1694-5,  according  to  law — one  third  of  the  movables 
and  the  use  of  the  real  estate  during  life,  to  the  widow,  a 
double  portion  of  the  remainder  to  the  oldest  son,  Abraham, 
and  equal  shares  to  the  other  children.  The  family  all  remov- 
ed to  Danbury,  the  widow  having  married  James  Benedict  of 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY.  135 

tliat  place.  In  March,  1707,  she  relinquished  her  right  to  the 
real  estate  in  Waterburj,  and  the  homestead  was  taken  bj  the 
eldest  son,  Abraham. 

Andruss  children,  all  mentioned  in  the  settlement  of  the 
estate  in  1707-8,  were,  as  far  as  known: 

1.  Sarah  ;  baptized  in  Farmington  March  9th,  1683-4,  and  m.  Thomas  Raymond 
of  Norwalk,  M'here  they  were  both  living  in  1723. 

2.  Abraham  ;  baptized  July  17,  1687, (?)  in  Farmington. 

3.  Mary;  baptized  in  Farmington  in  1689;  m.  James  Benedict  of  Danbury. 

4.  Benjamin. 

5.  Robert.* 

Andruss  propriety  was  owned  by  "William  Judd,  in  1721, 
and,  in  June  of  the  same  year,  was  sold  to  Samuel  Whittlesey 
of  Wallingford,  for  £1:2. 

BEXJAMIX  BARNES. 

His  father,  Tliomas  Barnes,  was  an  original  proprietor  and 
settler  of  Hartford  and  a  soldier  in  the  Pequot  war  of  1637. 
For  his  services  in  that  war,  he  received,  in  1671,  from  the 
colonial  Assembly,  a  grant  of  land  of  fifty  acres.  When  the 
settlement  of  Farmington  was  commenced,  he  became  a  pro- 
prietor and  settled  in  that  place.  He  was  appointed  a  ser- 
geant of  the  train-band  in  1651,  and  became  a  member  of  the 
church  in  1653.  His  wife  was  Mary,  daughter  of  Thomas 
Andrews.     He  died  in  1688.     His  children  were  : — 

1.  Benjamin  ;  b.  1653.  2.  Joseph  ;  baptized  1655  ;  m. 
July  8, 1684,  Abigail  Gibbs,  and  d.  Jan.  23, 1740-1.  3.  Sarah  ; 
m.  John  Scovill.  4.  Thomas  ;  m.  June,  1690,  Mary  Jones, 
and  became  a  deacon.  5.  Ebenezer ;  m.  April  8,  1690,  Debo- 
rah Orvis  or  Orvice,  and  died  1756. 

Benjamin  Barnes  was  accepted  as  a  proprietor  of  Water- 
bury,  Jan.  15,  1677,  (1677-8,)  taking  the  place  of  Eichard 
Seymour.  He  was  an  early  settler,  but  probably  was  not  of 
the  first  company.     He  had  no  allotment  of  fence  in  the  first 


*  Mary  Benedict  and  Abraham,  Robert  and  John  Andruss,  "  heirs  of  Abraham  Andruss,  coop- 
er," were  all  living  in  Danbury  in  1754.  (Wat.  L.  R.,  Vol.  VIII,  p.  514.)  Whether  this  John 
Andruss  was  a  son  of  cooper  Andruss,  or  a  grandson  and  represented  Benjamin's  interest,  I 
am  unable  to  say. 


136  HISTORY   OF  WATEKBURY. 

division;  but  his  name  is  found  in  tlie  other  divisions.  He 
signed  the  agreement  with  Mr.  Peck,  in  1689  ;  was  moderator 
of  propi'ietors'  meetings, in  1694-5  ;  "grave  digger  "  in  1699; 
townsman,  school  committee,  lister,  liayward,  collector  and 
grand  juror,  at  different  times;  deputy  to  the  General  Court, 
in  1703.  His  house  and  home  lot  of  two  acres  were  on  the 
corner  of  West  and  North  Main  streets,  the  lot  being  bounded, 
in  1687,  easterly  and  south  on  highway,  north  on  common  and 
westerly  on  Samuel  Hickox.  The  homestead  and  some  out- 
lands  he  conveyed,  in  1714,  to  his  son  Thomas,  in  considera- 
tion of  the  said  Thomas  taking  care  of  him  while  he  lived  and 
paying  his  just  debts,  "  and  taking  the  care  of  Iiis  father's  wife, 
if  he  should  haue  one,  with  a  comfortable  mantainance,  and 
the  whole  term  of  her  being  his  widow."  Afterwards,  in  1728, 
the  homestead,  now  two  and  a  half  acres,  was  conveyed  to 
Joseph  Smith,  father  and  son  uniting  in  the  deed.  When  the 
new  meeting  house  came  to  be  seated,  "  Goodman  Barnes," 
(still  a  widower,  apparently,)  along  with  other  aged  worthies, 
was  voted  into  the  first  pew  at  the  west  end  of  the  pulpit. 

Benjamin  Barnes  was  married  to  Sarah .     He  joined 

the  Farmington  church  March  22d,  1690-1.  He  died  April 
24,  1731,  being  the  last  of  the  original  proprietors  who  be- 
came settlers  as  early  as  he.  His  wife  died  in  the  great  sick- 
ness, Dec.  21st,   1712.     Their  children  were  : — 

1.  Benjamin;  b.  Sep.  1684  and  d.  in  May,  1Y09.  He  was  a  bachelor  proprietor, 
and  his  estate,  being  thirty  eight  acres  and  a  £40  propriety,  was  distributed  to  his 
brothers  and  sisters. 

2.  John;  b.  Aug.  12,  1686,  and  was  baptized  in  Farmington,  (together  with  his 
brother,  Benjamin,)  Dec.  1,  1689.  He  became  a  bachelor  proprietor  at  the  age 
of  21 ;  m.  March  28,  1728,  Mary,  widow  of  Samuel  Porter  and  d.  of  John  Bron- 
son,  and  died  March  21,  1763.  His  widow  died  Jan.  27,  1774.  He  had  five  child- 
ren, the  four  youngest  of  whom  died  in  the  great  sickness  of  1749.  His  occupa- 
tion was  that  of  a  "husbandman."    He  lived  at  Judd's  Meadow,  west  of  the  river. 

3.  A  son;  b.  May  10,  1689  ;  d.  the  same  month. 

4.  Thomas;  b.  May  11,  1690;  baptized  in  Farmington,  June  8,  1690.  He  had 
a  bachelor  lot,  and  was  at  different  times  selectman,  school  committee,  constable, 
&c.  He  was  a  shoemaker  and  is  called,  also,  "cordwinder."  In  Feb.  1718-19, 
his  fiither  gave  to  him,  in  the  language  of  the  deed,  "  fifty  acres  of  land  belong- 
ing to  me  which  was  given  to  my  father  by  the  generall  court  for  pequot  war 
serus."  After  the  sale  of  his  father's  homestead,  he  lived,  for  a  time,  on  the  south- 
west corner  of  Cook  and  Grove  streets.  This  place  he  sold,  in  1735,  to  Jonathan 
Garnsey,  and  in  1752,  lived  on  the  west  side  of  Willow  street,  a  little  north  of 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURT,  137 

Grove,  in  a  house  which  is  still  standing.  He  was  a  sergeant  in  the  train-band,  and 
m.  "Jan.  4,  1721,"  Susanna,  the  d.  of  Edward  Scovill  of  Haddam.  They  had 
six  children.  He  died  Nov.  29,  1772.  His  will,  dated  Dec.  1768,  mentions  his 
wife,  Susanna,  a  married  daughter,  Susanna  Tcrrel,  and  one  son,  Daniel. 

5.  Ebenezer;  b.  "March  15,  1G93,"  and  d.  "March  10,  1713." 

6.  Sarah  ;  b.  Aug.  15,  1695,  and  m.  Thomas  Day,  Jr.  They  lived  in  Colches- 
ter in  1723,  and  then  sold  all  their  rights  of  land  in  Waterbury  to  Thomas 
Barnes. 

7.  Samuel;  b.  "March  16,  1697  ;"  m.  June  4,  1722,  Mary,  d.  of  John  Johnson 
of  Derby,  and  had  nine  children. 

BRONSON. 

The  name  is  usually  spelled  Browuson  on  the  Ilartfoid  and 
Bruuson  on  the  Farmington  records.  John  Bronson,  the  father 
of  the  Waterbury  Bronsons,  was  early  in  Hartford.  He  is  be- 
lieved, though  not  certainly  known,  to  have  been  one  of  the 
company  who  came  with  Mr.  Hooker,  in  1636,  of  whose 
church  he  was  a  member.  He  was  a  soldier  in  the  bloody 
Pequot  battle  of  1637.  He  is  not  named  among  the  proprie- 
tors of  Hartford  in  the  land  division  of  1639  ;  but  is  mention- 
ed in  the  same  year  in  the  list  of  settlers,  who,  by  the  "towne's 
courtesie"  had  liberty  "to  fetch  woode  and  keepe  swine  or 
cowes  on  the  common."  His  house  lot  was  in  the  "soldiers 
held,"  so  called,  in  the  north  part  of  the  old  village  of  Hartford, 
on  the  "Neck  Eoad,"  (supposed  to  have  been  given  for  service 
in  the  Pequot  war,)  where  he  lived  in  1640.  Hinman,  in  his 
"  First  Puritan  Settlers,"  thinks  that  his  father,  then  an  aged 
man,  owning  no  land,  Kichard  by  name,  was  with  him.  Nov. 
9th,  16-10,  he  (John  Bronson)  and  Andrew  "Warner  were  fined 
five  shillings  "for  putting  their  hogs  over  the  Great  Piver, 
and  five  shillings  for  every  day  they  left  them  there." 

After  the  purchase  of  Tunxis  (Farmington)  by  the  Hart- 
ford people,  John  Bronson,  about  1611,  removed  to  that  place. 
His  house  lot  was  on  a  road  running  out  of  the  village  in  an 
easterly  direction  and  half  a  mile  distant.  (Kichard  Bronson, 
supposed  to  have  been  his  brother,  also  an  original  proprietor 
and  from  Hartford,  lived  near  by.)  He  was  one  of  the  seven 
pillars  at  the  organization  of  the  Farmington  church,  in  1652. 
He  was  a  deputy  to  the  General  Court,  in  May,  1651,  and  at 
several  subsequent  sessions,  and  "  the  constable  of  Farming- 


138  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 

ton,"  who  collected  the  rate  for  "j^Fort  at  Seahrook,"  in 
1652.  May  10th,  1670,  "  Cherry  and  will  the  indian  with 
three  of  the  milford  Indians  were  adjudged  to  pay  to  him  for 
sider  they  stole  from  him  twenty  shillings."  His  name  is  on 
the  list  of  freemen  of  Farmington  in  1G69.  He  died  JSTov.  28, 
1680.— Estate  £312.     His  children  were  :— 

1.  Jacob  ;  b.  Jan.  1641,  m.  Mary ;  left  posterity,  and  d. 

170S.  He  lived  in  Farmington,  in  the  society  of  Kensington. 
2.  John;  b.  Jan.  16M.  3.  Isaac;  b.  Nov.  1645,  baptized 
Dec.  7,  1645,  in  Hartford,  by  Mr.  Hooker.  4.  Mary  ;  m.  an 
Ellis  or  Allis.  5.  Abraham  ;  baptized  Nov.  28,  1647.  He 
signed  the  Mattatuck  articles,  but  declined  the  responsibilities 
of  a  planter.  He  removed  to  Lyme,  and  m.  Hannah,  d.  of 
Mathew  Griswold,  and  d.  at  an  advanced  age,  (Hinman  says 
in  1647,  which  is  probably  a  mistake,)  leaving  descendants. 
6.  Dorcas ;  m.  Stephen  Hopkins  of  Hartford,  father  of  John  of 
Waterbury,  and  d.  May  13,  1697.  7.  Sarah;  m.  Ebenezer 
Kilbourn  of  Wethersfield. 

JOHN  BRONSON. 

He  was  one  of  the  thirty  original  subscribers,  in  1674.  The 
name  is  written  "John  Bronson,  Jr."  The  "Jr."  on  the 
Farmington  records  was  usually  applied  to  the  son  of  Eich- 
ard;  which  fact  has  led  to  the  conclusion  that  the  settler  in 
Mattatuck  was  the  son  of  Kichard,  and  not  of  John.  I  believe,' 
however,  but  am  not  entirely  confident,  that  John  of  Water- 
bury  was  the  son  of  John  of  Farmington.  I  find  this  language 
used  on  the  Farmington  records,  under  date  of  March  28, 
1695 — "  Land  in  Farmington  belonging  to  John  Browuson : 
son  of  John  Brownson,  at  Watterbury."  John,  the  son  of 
the  Waterbury  John,  lived  in  Farmington.  But  John,  the  son 
of  Richard,  appears  also  have  had  a  son  John. 

John  Bronson  was  an  early  settler  of  Mattatuck.  He  is  not, 
however,  named  in  the  second  division  of  fence,  whicli  fact  in- 
dicates that  he  vacillated  for  a  time.  He  lived  on  the  north 
side  of  West  Main  street,  where  William  R.  Hitchcock  now 
resides,  having  a  lot  of  two  acres;  bounded  north  and  south  on 
highway,  east  on  Lieut.  Judd,  west  on  Thomas  Eichason.  He 
m.  Sarah  Yentris  and  d.  1796.     His  widow  d.  Jan.  6,  1711- 


niSTOEY   OF   WATEUBURY.  139 

12.  The  inventory  of  his  estate,  amounting  to  £1^1, 6s.  6d.,  with 
£22,  3s.  debts,  was  taken  Nov.  7,  1690.  The  estate  was  dis- 
tributed by  Isaac  Bronson  and  Dea.  Thomas  Jndd,  according 
to  an  order  of  the  Court.  The  widow  was  to  have  a  double 
part  and  the  chiklren  to  share  equally,  leaving  out  the  eldest 
son  John: — 

It  appearing  to  this  court  )'  y«  eldest  soon  has  already  receiued  his  full  part  by 
deed  of  gift  from  his  father  iu  his  life  time  and  by  his  own  acknowledgment  in 
court — it  is  to  be  understood  y»  y«  widow  is  to  have  one  third  part  of  y«  rale 
estate  during  her  naturall  life  and  a  double  part  of  y«  personal  estate. 

Children  : 

1.  John;  b.  1670;  d.  June  15,  1716.  He  removed  to  Farmington  (the  part 
which  is  now  Southington)  and  had  several  children. 

2.  Sarah ;  b.  1672. 

3.  Dorothy;  b.  1675;  m.  Stephen  Kelsey  of  Wethersfield.  They  were  both 
living  in  1723,  and  deeded  their  right  in  their  father  Bronson's  estate  to  their 
son  Stephen  Kelsey  of  Wethersfield,  (afterwards  of  Waterbury.) 

4.  Ebenezcr;  b.  1077  ;  m.  Mary  Munn,  Aug.  13,  1702,  and  d.  May  23,  1727, 
leaving  daughters,  Elizabeth  Knowles,  Bethiah,  wife  of  Lemuel  Wheeler,  and 
others.     He  lived  and  died  in  Woodbury.     (See  Cothren's  Woodbury.) 

5.  William  ;  b.  1682  ;  m.  in  1707,  Esther  Barnes  ;  and  d.  in  1761,  having  had 
several  sons  and  daughters.  He  removed  to  Farmington  at  an  early  date.  To 
him  his  Cither's  homestead  was  distributed  "as  his  whole  portion,"  valued  at 
£14,  16s  4d. 

6.  Moses;  b.  1686;  m.  Jane  W^ait  of  Stratford,  and  d.  Aug.  12,  1754.  His 
widow  and  all  his  children,  thirteen  in  number,  are  named  on  the  Probate  record 
as  living  at  his  decease.  He  was  admitted  as  a  bachelor  proprietor  Jan.  7,  1706- 
7,  and  again  in  Nov.  1722,  having  the  "fifth  propriety  lot,"  so  called,  which  was 
formerly  his  own.  It  seems  that  he  left  Waterbury  and  was  absent  several  years. 
His  friends  having  no  intelligence  from  him  supposed  him  dead,  and  the  Court,  in 
1712,  ordered  his  brother  William  to  take  all  needful  care  of  his  estate.  (Hinman's 
Puritans.)  He  was  discovered,  however,  the  next  year,  in  Stratford,  where  he  re- 
mained some  time  afterwards,  having  several  children  born  there.  I  find  no  men- 
tion made  of  him,  as  an  inhabitant  of  Waterbury,  from  Feb.  1709-10,  till  after  Nov. 
28, 1722,  when  his  bachelor  lot  was  granted  him  a  second  time.  Thomas  Sherwood 
of  Stratford  assisted  him  in  obtaining  this  grant,  for  which  assistance,  and  for  his 
journey,  Bronson  conveyed  to  him,  by  a  quit  claim  deed,  "one  half  of  the  one 
hundred  and  twenty  three  acres"  of  land-divisions  then  to  be  taken  up,  on  the 
said  bachelor's  right.  Bronson  returned  to  Waterbury  about  1723.  He  lived  up 
the  river  on  the  west  side. 

7.  Grace;  b.  1689. 


140  HISTORY    OF    WAl-ERBURY. 


ISAAC   BROXSON. 


He  was  one  of  the  original  thirty  subscribers,  and  is  be- 
lieved to  have  been  one  of  the  first  company  who  came  to 
Waterbury,  having  a  meadow  allotment  in  the  beginning  and 
being  named  in  all  the  divisions  of  common  fence.  He  ap- 
pears to  have  complied  promptly  with  all  the  conditions  of  the 
articles  of  settlement.  He  lived  on  l^orth  Main  street,  a  lit- 
tle north  of  the  house  of  Augustus  Brown,  having  a  lot  of  four 
acres,  bounded,  in  1687,  westerly  on  highway,  southerly  on 
John  Stanley,  northerly  on  John  I^ewell  and  easterly  on  com- 
mon land.  March  31,  1694,  he  purchased  John  Newell's 
house  and  lot  of  five  acres  next  adjoining  him  on  the  north. 

Isaac  Bronson  was  one  of  the  patentees  named  in  the  fii'st 
town  patent.  He  joined  the  Farmington  church.  May  15th, 
1684,  and  w^as  active  in  establishing  a  church  in  Watei'bury. 
He  was  a  petitioner  with  Mr.  Peck  to  the  General  Court  for 
liberty  "  to  gather  "  a  church,  and  was  one  of  its  seven  pillars 
at  its  final  organization,  in  1691.  When  the  train-band  was 
re-organized,  after  the  town  was  incorporated,  in  1689,  he  was 
appointed  corporal.  About  1695,  he  became  sergeant,  and 
ever  afterwards  was  known  as  Sergeant  Bronson.  He  was 
deputy  in  May,  1697,  and  Oct.  1701,  and  townsman,  school 
committee,  town  surveyor,  &c.,  at  different  times.  He  seems  . 
to  have  been  one  of  the  most  respected  of  the  early  settlers. 
When  it  became  necessary  to  provide  for  his  declining  years, 
he  deeded  half  his  homestead,  etc.,  to  his  youngest  son  Ebe- 
nezer,  on  condition  as  follows : — ^Tlie  instrument  is  dated  June 
23d,  1714,  and  is  signed  by  a  mark,  in  consequence,  doubtless, 
of  feeble  health.  The  grantor  wrote,  in  his  better  days,  a  fair 
hand,  for  the  times.  Specimens  of  his  writing  may  be  seen  in 
the  old  proprietors'  book,  (pamphlet  form,)  he  having  some- 
times acted  as  temporary  clerk. 

Know  ye  that  i  Isack  brounson  senr  [&c.]  in  consideration  of  my  son  cbcnezer 
brounson  hoo  now  Hues  with  me  finding  of  me  and  my  wife  mary  brounson  with  a 
sutable  and  comfortable  mantenance  and  takingthe  whole  care  of  us  both  while  we 
Hue  both  in  siknes  and  in  helth  I  say  for  and  in  consideration  here  of  I  do  giue  and 
grant  to  my  well  be  loueed  ebinezer  brounson  [&c.]  the  one  half  of  my  hom  lot  upon 
which  my  dwelling  hous  now  stands  which  land  is  esteemed  two  acres  and  a  half  be 


IIISTOKT    OF    WATERBUKY.  lil 

it  more  or  less  as  it  lies  buted  and  bounded  south  on  samuell  standly  east  on  John 
brounson  west  on  highway  north  on  the  remainder  of  my  homsted.  Then  my 
whole  right  in  the  lot  he  bought  of  John  Warner — Item,  half  my  team  two 
young  heffers  and  a  young  mare  and  One  half  of  all  my  tackling  and  Imploments 
belonging  to  a  team  To  haue  and  to  hold  [&c.] 

Several  years  afterwards,  or  Dec.  2,  1718,  Ebenezer  relin- 
quislied  his  interest  in  liis  fatlier's  homestead,  and  his  brother 
and  brother-indaw,  Thomas  Bronson  and  Thomas  liickox,  in 
consideration  of  five  acres  of  land  on  the  Farmington  road, 
being  the  Tailor  lot,  so  called,  valued  at  £8,  received  of  Ebe- 
nezer, assumed  the  care  of  their  father  and  mother.  On  the 
same  day,  the  father  deeded  to  Ebenezer,  "  that  he  may  be 
sutably  rewarded  and  incouraged  for  what  he  has  done  for 
us,"  one  acre  of  his  home  lot. 

Isaac  Bronson  m.  about  16G0,  Mary,  daughter  of  John 
Root  of  Farmington,  a  non-fulfilling  subscriber  of  the  articles. 
He  d.  about  1719,  and  his  widow  soon  after.  An  inventory 
of  his  estate  was  presented  to  court,  Feb.  29,  1719-20,  by 
"  Mr.  Isaac  Bronson,"  his  son,  with  an  agreement  among  the 
heirs  as  to  its  settlement,  they  giving  bonds  for  the  support  of 
the  widow.  The  oldest  son  was  to  have  £7  more  than  the 
other  sons,  and  the  latter  £7  more  than  the  daughters,  eight 
in  all.  The  amount  distributed  was  £386.  Thomas  Clark  and 
John  Richards  were  appraisers  of  the  estate. 

Children  : 

1.  I.saae ;  b.  ICTO,  and  died  June  13,  1751.  As  early  as  March,  169-1—5,  he 
(with  others)  had  a  grant  of  land  out  East,  on  the  south  side  of  the  Farmington 
road,  near  Carrington  Pond,  (south  of  Timothy  Porter's,)  where  he  proposed  to 
settle  ;  but  the  enterprise  was  given  up.  After  his  marriage,  he  purchased  (April 
24,  1704)  of  Ephraim  Warner  a  house  and  lot  on  the  northwest  corner  of  Cook  and 
Grove  streets,  where  he  perhaps  lived  for  a  time.  He  owned  land  at  Breakneck 
Hill  at  an  early  date.  In  June,  1701,  he  purchased  of  Thomas  Warner  twelve 
acres  on  the  south  side  of  the  Woodbury  road.  He  went  there  to  Hve  before 
March,  1707,  (X.  S.,)  and  is  considered  as  the  first  permanent  settler  of  what  is 
now  Middlebury.  According  to  a  tradition  of  the  family,  his  eldest  son,  Isaac, 
was  the  first  child  born  (March  27,  1707)  within  the  limits  of  that  town.  His  house 
stood  where  Leonard  Bronson  now  lives.  He  was  a  bachelor  proprietor  ;  a  deputy 
to  the  General  Court  in  1723  and  1733,  and  one  of  the  most  respectable  and  in- 
fluential men  of  the  town  for  many  years. 

2.  John  ;  b.  1673,  and  died  about  the  close  of  the  year  1746.  His  inventory 
amounted  to  £1,184,  4s.  8d.  He  is  supposed  to  have  lived  first  at  Breakneck.  His 
father  owned  a  house  there  as  early  as  April  6,  1702,  and  it  is  probable  that  John 


142  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

occupied  it.  The  latter  had  a  house  of  his  own  at  Breakneck  and  twenty-two 
acres  of  land,  Feb.  27th,  1705-6,  which  he  bought,  by  exchange,  of  Joseph  Gay- 
lord,  Sen.  Afterwards,  with  his  father's  help,  he  built  a  house  on  the  east  end  of 
his  father's  lot,  on  Cherry,  near  the  junction  of  Walnut  street.  His  father  gave 
him  the  land,  (on  which  the  house  had  already  been  built,  Jan.  29,  l7u7-8,)  two 
acres,  butting  east  on  highway,  (which  at  this  point  was  six  rods  wide,)  west  on 
his  father's  land,  north  on  Benjamin  Barnes'  and  south  on  Thomas  Hickox's  land. 
In  April,  1743,  he  bought  the  old  Hopkins'  place ;  but  whether  he  lived  on  it,  I 
am  unable  to  say.  He  became  a  lieutenant  of  the  militia  and  was,  two  or  three 
times,  selectman.  He  was  licensed  as  a  tavern-keeper  by  the  New  Haven  County 
Court  in  1730  and  afterwards.  It  appears  to  have  been  his  son  John,  who  was  also 
a  lieutenant,  who  removed  to  Northbury  about  1737,  and  afterwards  to  Amenia, 
N.  Y. 

3.  Samuel ;  born  about  1676.     He  was  a  cooper,  and  lived  in  Kensington. 

4.  Mary;  b.  Oct.  15,  1G80;  m.  Dea.  Thomas  Hickox  and  died  in  1756.  She 
seems  to  have  been  a  woman  of  great  efficiency,  and  while  a  widow,  managed  her 
own  business  and  property,  dealing  much  in  real  estate. 

5.  Joseph;  b.  1682,  and  d.  May  10,  1707.  His  estate  was  distributed  among  his 
brothers  and  sisters  in  1721,  amounting  to  £24 — a  £40  propriety  being  estimated 
at  £5  and  sixty-eight  acres  of  land,  (being  dividends  on  it,)  at  £19. 

6.  Thomas;  b.  Jan.  16,  1686,  and  d.  May  6,  1777.  He  was  the  fifth  deacon 
(appointed  1750)  of  the  Waterbury  first  church,  his  son  Thomas  being  the  sixth. 
He  had  a  house  and  four  acres  of  land  on  the  corner  of  Cook  and  Grove  streets? 
which  he  sold  to  Joseph  Smith  of  Derby,  Dec.  30th,  1726,  for  £145  ;  butted  west 
on  heirs  of  George  Scott  and  Thomas  Barnes,  all  other  sides  on  highway. 
The  land  he  bought  in  1717  of  his  brother  John  for  £8.  After  the  death  of  his 
father,  he  bought  of  his  brother  Ebenezer,  (in  1726,)  the  family  homestead,  which 
he  afterwards  occupied.     He  was  a  Ueutcnant,  and  is  so  called  on  his  gravestone. 

7.  Ebenezer  ;  b.  Dec.  1688.  He  was  baptized  in  Farmington,  as  were  his  older 
brothers  and  his  sister  Mary.  He  was  a  bachelor  proprietor,  and  so  were  his 
brothers  Isaac,  John,  Joseph  and  Thomas.  He  improved  the  old  homestead  for 
several  years  after  the  death  of  his  father.  In  April,  1735,  he  bought  of  William 
Judd  the  place  on  the  southwest  corner  of  West  Main  and  Willow  streets,  where  he 
jived  in  1744,  and  I  suppose  till  his  death,  and  where  his  son  Andrew  lived  after  him. 
In  his  will,  he  speaks  of  having  already  given  his  oldest  son  Andrew,  "  by  way  of 
acknowledgement  of  him  as  my  eldest  son,  a  yoak  of  steers,  with  £20  old  tenor 
money,  and  some  other  small  matters."  He  bequeathed  to  the  first  church  in 
Waterbury,  "  forty  shillings,  lawful  money,  to  lye  in  bank  for  the  use  and  benefit 
of  the  church,  the  interest  to  be  improved,"  so  long  as  the  church  continue  "  in 
the  present  form  and  method,"  &c.  He  d.  July  20,  1775.  The  amount  of  his  in- 
ventory was  £868,  lis.  4d.     He  is  called  in  deeds,  "  yeoman." 

8.  Sarah ;  b.  Nov.  15,  1691,  and  d.  1748. 

9.  Mercy  ;  b.  Sept.  28,  1694,  and  m.  Richard  Bronson  of  Woodbury. 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY.  143 


JOHN  CARRINGTON. 


He  was  an  early  settler  of  Farmington  and  one  of  the 
"  eighty-four  proprietors  "  of  1672.  He  signed  the  articles  for 
the  settlement  of  Mattatuck,  in  1674,  and  appears  to  have 
joined  the  new  plantation  early  ;  for  he  is  named  in  all  the 
divisions  of  fence.  He,  however,  neglected  full  compliance 
with  the  conditions  of  the  articles,  and  was  declared  to  have 
forfeited  his  rights,  Feb.  6, 1682,  (1682-3.)  But  little  is  known 
of  him.  He  died  in  the  early  part  of  1690,  leaving  a  widow 
who  deceased  before  the  inventory  was  rendered,  (June  30, 
1690.)  His  son  John  was  administrator  and  the  estate  amount- 
ed to  £120,  lis.  John  had  £23,  each  of  the  other  children 
£12.  Benjamin  Barnes  and  Thomas  Judd,  the  smith,  were 
appointed  guardians  of  the  three  youngest  children,  with  in- 
structions to  put  them  out,  and  not  to  be  overruled  by  John, 
the  administrator. 

John  Carrington's  house  lot  of  two  acres  was  on  West  Main 
street,  the  south  side,  about  where  Leavenworth  street  now 
runs.  It  was  bounded  north  and  south  on  highway,  east  on 
Timi:>thy  Stanley,  west  on  George  Scott.  It  was  sold,  in  1710, 
by  tlie  heirs,  to  Timothy  Stanley  and  George  Scott,  for  £12. 

Children  : 

1.  John;  b.  l607,  and  d.  1602,  in  Waterbury.  Benjamin  Barnes  and  Thomas 
Judd,  Jr.  were  administrators.  The  estate,  amounting  to  £.59,  17s.  2d,  was  distribu- 
ted, his  debts  being  first  paid,  to  his  brothers  and  sisters.     He  was  a  cooper. 

2.  Mary;  b.  1672;  m.  Joshua  Holcomb(?)  of  Simsbury.  She  was  the  wife  of 
William  Parsons  of  Farmington  in  1721  and  1734-55. 

3.  Hannah ;  b.  1675 ;  m.  William  Parsons  of  Farmington,  according  to  Mr.  W. 
S.  Porter.     Should  not  the  name  be  Joshua  Holcomb  of  Simsbury  ? 

4.  Clark;  b.  1678  ;  m.  Sarah  Higason,  and  lived  in  Farmington.  He  was  there 
in  1721-2. 

5.  Elizabeth  ;  b.  1682  :  m.  John  Hoskins  of  Windsor. 

6.  Ebenezer ;  b.  1687  ;  removed  to  Hartford,  and  died  in  Waterbury,  adminis- 
tration being  taken  out,  (in  1711,)  by  his  brother-in-law,  William  Parsons  of  Hart- 
ford.    He  left  no  family. 

THOMAS  CLARK. 

His  grandfather,  William  Clark,  came  from  England  and 
settled  in  Dorchester,  Mass.,  about  1637.  Thence  he  removed 
to  Xorthampton,  in  1659,  and  d.  in  1690.     His  son  William, 


144:  III3T0RT   OF   WATERBURT. 

the  father  of  Tliomas  of  Waterburj,  after  the  hirtli  of  his 
children,  removed  to  Lebanon,  Conn. 

Thomas  Clark  was  born  (in  ISTorthampton)  Aprill4,  1690. 
His  mother  Sarah  (Strong)  was  the  sister  of  Timothy  Stan- 
ley's wife.  When  a  mere  child,  as  tradition  runs,  his  uncle 
Stanley  visited  his  father's  house  in  Lebanon  and  inquired,  at 
first  in  a  sportive  way,  which  of  his  young  nephews  would  go 
and  live  with  him  and  be  his  boy,  as  he  had  none  of  his  own. 
Thomas  spoke  up  promptly  and  said  that  he  would  go.  But 
as  he  was  so  young,  it  was  finally  arranged  that  his  elder  broth- 
er, Timothy,  should  accompany  his  uncle  to  Waterbury.  But 
Timothy  soon  became  home-sick  and  returned  to  Lebanon  and 
Thomas  was  allowed  to  take  his  place,  to  become,  afterwards, 
the  adopted  son  and  principal  heir  of  Stanley.  He  was  acce2:)t- 
ed  as  a  £10  proprietor,  Dec.  12,  1711.  He  became  a  "  cloth- 
weaver,"  learning  his  trade  of  his  uncle,  with  whom  he  con- 
tinued to  live  after  marriage,  managing  the  farm,  and  taking 
care  of  the  "  old  folks."  In  June,  1713,  his  father,  by  adop- 
tion, deeded  to  him  a  part  of  his  property,  and  at  his  death 
gave  him  a  large  proportion  of  the  remainder,  by  will.  After 
the  decease  of  Stanlej^,  Clark  occupied  the  old  homestead. 
Here  he  wove  "  plain  cloth  at  ls-8d  pr.  yard,"*  "  checkerd 
shirtin  at  Is  3d  per  yard  ;"  "  druged  [drugget]  at  12d.  a 
yard ;"  striped  fiannel,  &c.,  &c.  He  probably  occupied 
himself  at  his  loom  during  the  winter  season  and  in  bad  weath- 
er. He  continued  to  cultivate  his  farm  and  exchanged  its  sur- 
plus products  for  the  spare  products  of  his  neighbors'  in- 
dustry. He  had  a  slave,  named  Mingo,f  who,  when  not  need- 
ed at  home,  worked  for  those  who  wanted  him,  for  hire. 
"When  his  sons  became  old  enough — Timothy,  Thomas,  David 
— they  occasionally  labored  at  farm  work,  for  others,  frequent- 
ly with  the  team,  and  their  wages  were  charged  to  the  debt- 
ors by  their  father.  The  girls,  too — Mary,  Sarah,  Hannah, 
Hepzibah — though  belonging  to  one  of  the  "  first  families  " 

*  The  book  in  which  he  liept  his  "  accounts,"  commencing  in  1727,  is  now  in  my  possession, 
having  been  loaned  me  by  his  granddaughter,  Mrs.  Aurelia  Clark. 

t  At  Dea.  Clark's  death,  Mingo  was  to  be  permitted  to  choose  which  of  his  master's  sons  he 
would  live  with.  Being  attached  to  his  old  home,  he  resided  for  a  time  with  Thomas;  but  after 
the  latter  commenced  keeping  tavern,  he  did  not  like  his  occupaticn  and  went  to  live  with 
Timothy,  on  Town  Plot.    lie  died,  worth  considerable  property,  in  ISOO. 


rAii'iua)  nYJmm  rpr'iB  ■ 


J.Kelly.  I^nhr.J^T 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUEY.  145 

of  the  town,  and  having  more  than  the  nsnal  accomplish- 
ments of  that  time,  frequently  "  went  out  to  work "  by  the 
day,  or  the  week,  thus  contributing  to  the  support  of  a  numer- 
ous family.  Honest  labor  was  in  those  days  respectable,  and 
none  was  too  good  to  engage  in  it.  In  addition  to  his  other 
business,  Mr.  Clark  seems  to  have  kept  for  sale  some  of  the 
common  goods  which  are  found  in  a  retail  store,such  as  "  shug- 
ger,"  molasses,  salt,  wine,  "  rumb,"  tobacco,  nails.  He  ap- 
pears to  have  bought  his  goods  sometimes  in  Derby  and  some- 
times in  JSIew  Haven.  He  also  occasionally  took  boarders, 
and  has  several  charges  against  the  Colony  for  "victeling  "  sol- 
diers that  were  passing  through  the  town.  Being  appointed 
a  justice  of  the  peace  in  1730,  (which  office  he  held  twenty- 
five  out  of  the  twenty -nine  years  of  his  remaining  life,)  he  be- 
came somewhat  acquainted  with  legal  forms,  and  was  often 
applied  to  to  draw  deeds,  bonds,  agreements  and  such  simple 
writings  as  are  most  called  for  among  a  rural  population. 

No  man  in  his  day  succeeded  more  completely  in  securing 
the  good  opinion  and  entire  confidence  of  his  fellow  towns- 
men, than  Thomas  Clark.  He  occupied  positions  of  trust  and 
responsibility.  He  was  a  selectman  in  1834,  1736  and  1737  ; 
a  town  deputy  in  Oct.  1727,  1728  and  1736;  town  treasurer 
from  1755  to  1760  and  a  justice  of  the  peace,  as  has  been  men- 
tioned. On  Mr.  Southmayd's  death  in  1755,  he  was  chosen 
town  and  proprietor's  clerk,  and  was  continued  in  office  till  his 
decease.  He  wrote  not  an  elegant,  but  a  very  legible  hand. 
He  was  the  third  deacon  of  the  church,  being  appointed  in 
1728  to  succeed  Dea.  Plickox,  who  died  in  that  year. 

Thomas  Clark's  son  Thomas  succeeded  his  father  in  the  oc- 
cupancy of  the  homestead,  and  kept  a  tavern  till  his  decease, 
Oct.  25,  1779.  The  house  was  the  scene  of  some  interesting 
events  during  the  Revolutionary  War.  Capt.  Lemuel  Har- 
rison's dwelling  was  built,  for  the  most  part,  ou  the  same  foun- 
dations as  the  "  old  Clark  house." 

JOSEPH  GAYLORD. 

He  was  the  son  of  Walter  Gaylord  and  the  grandson   of 
Dea.  William  Gaylord  of  Windsor;  the  latter  a  leading  man 
of  that  town.     He  was  born  May  13,  1649,  and  m.  July  14, 
10 


146  HISTOKT   OF   WATEEBUKY. 

1670,  Sarah,  d.  of  John  Stanley  of  Farmington.  Whether  he 
removed  from  Windsor  first  to  Farmington  and  then  to  Mat- 
tatuck,  or  directly  from  Windsor  to  Mattatnck,  is  uncertain. 
He  was  not  one  of  the  first  subscribers  of  the  articles ;  but  was 
accepted  Jan.  15, 1677,(1677-8.)  He  came  to  Mattatuck  early, 
probably  in  the  spring  of  1678,  and  is  named  in  the  four  divis- 
ions of  fence.  Still,  he  did  not  keep  his  engagements,  and  his 
right  was  declared  forfeited,  Feb.  1682-3.  But  he  "submit- 
ted," and  by  better  performance,  regained  and  perfected  his  title 
to  an  £80  pro^Driety.  He  is  mentioned  in  all  the  lists  of  proprie- 
tors. He  was  collector  of  minister's  rates  in  1698,  1699  and 
IVOO.  In  1687,  his  lot  of  three  acres  was  on  the  corner  of  East 
and  North  Main  streets — south  and  west  on  highway,  north 
on  John  Stanley  and  east  on  common.  This  place,  with  the 
house  and  barn,  he  sold,  Feb.  2,  1703,  (1703-4,)  to  Stephen 
Welton,  son  of  John,  reserving  a  quarter  of  an  acre  at  the 
east  end  on  which  his  son  Joseph  had  erected  a  dwelling. 
After  this,  he  built  a  house  at  Breakneck,  (or  at  any  rate  he 
owned  one  there  with  twenty-two  acres  of  land,)  which  he  sold 
and  deeded,  Feb.  26,  1705-6,  to  John  Bronson,  "  son  of  Isaac," 
as  already  stated.  Whether  he  lived  for  a  time  at  Breakneck,  I 
have  no  means  of  ascertaining  with  certainty,  though  it  is 
probable  he  did.  Most  likely  he  sold  out  as  a  preparation  for 
removing  from  the  town.  Several  members  of  his  family  had 
already  gone  to  Durham,  and  he  soon  followed,  there  being 
no  traces  of  him  in  Waterbury  after  the  sale  referred  to.  I 
find  him  in  Durham  in  the  early  part  of  1708,  where  he  died 
before  1713. 
Children : 

1.  Sarah;  b.  July  11,  1671 ;  m.  Thomas  Judd,  known  as  Thomas  Judd,  Jr. 

2.  Joseph;  b.  April  22,  1673;  m.  Feb.  8,  1699-1700,  Mary,  d.  of  Joseph 
Hickox,  deed.,  of  Woodbury,  and  had  three  children,  Elizabeth,  Joseph  (died  in 
infancy)  and  Thankful,  all  born  in  Waterbury.  He  was  chosen  fence  viewer  in 
1698  and  1703,  and  admitted  to  bachelor  privileges  in  1699.  He  built  a  house 
on  East  Main  street,  on  the  east  end  of  his  father's  lot.  In  April,  1702,  the  propri- 
etors granted  him  and  his  brothers  John  and  William,  and  Richard  Porter,  "  eight 
acres  apiece,  at  the  place  they  talk  of  going  to  live  at  on  the  west  side  [the  river], 
provided  they  go  and  live  there  with  their  families."  To  this  place,  presumed  to 
be  Breakneck,  where  his  father  built  a  house,  he  (and  the  others)  did  not  go. 
Afterwards,  probably  in  1703  or  1704,  he  and  his  brother  John  erected  houses  on 
Buckshill  and  removed  thither.     They  were,  however,  not  contented  ;  but  soon 


HISTOKY    OF    WATERBUEY.  147 

pulled  up  and  went  to  Durham.  Joseph  had  left  as  early  as  Jan.  7,  1705-6.  The 
names  of  both  and  that  of  their  father,  and  also  of  their  brothers-in-law,  Joseph 
and  Stephen  Hickox,  are  mentioned  in  the  patent  of  Durham,  in  1708.  In  Oct. 
1708,  for  "eleven  pounds  in  building  and  four  pounds  teen  shillings  to  be  dun 
in  worck  at  &<>  durrum,"  Gaylord  deeded  to  Richard  Welton  his  house  and  lot  of 
seven  acres  at  Buckshill — "east  on  highway,  west  on  said  Gayland's  land,  south 
on  John  Gayland's  house  lot,  north  on  John  Warner's  house  lot." 

Joseph  Gayland,  2d,  after  having  lived  in  Durham  many  years,  removed  to 
Wallingford.  He  and  his  brothers,  John  and  Benjamin,  and  his  sister,  Joanna 
Royce,  were  in  the  latter  place  in  1722.  "Joseph  Gaylord,  Jr.,"  was  in  Water- 
bury  in  1730,  apparently  from  Wallingford. 

3.  John  ;  b.  April  21,  1677  ;  was  one  of  the  first  nine  bachelor  proprietors,  ad- 
mitted March  26,  1799.  He  lived  by  the  side  of  his  brother  Joseph  on  Buckshill^ 
having  a  lot  of  six  and  three  quarter  acres,  butting  north  on  Joseph  Gaylord,  Jr's 
house  lot,  east  and  south  on  highway,  west  on  common,  which  he  bought  of  "  John 
AVarner  of  Buckshill."  He  removed  with  his  elder  brother  to  Durham,  and  finally 
to  Wallingford,  where  he  d.  about  1753.  His  will  was  presented  to  the  Probate 
Court  in  New  Haven  the  first  Monday  in  January,  1754,  in  M'hich  he  names  six 
sons  and  five  daughters.  His  estate  in  Wallingford  amounted  to  £1,995,  and  in 
Farmington  to  about  £560. 

Sarah,  Joseph  and  John  Gaylord,  children  of  Joseph,  Sen.,  were  born  in  Windsor. 

4.  WiUiam.  He  was  accepted  as  a  £40  proprietor,  March,  1701,  but  forfeited  his 
right,  removed  to  Woodbury  and  joined  the  church  there,  Jan.  13,  1706.  He 
was  among  those  taxed  for  the  "North  Purchase"  in  1712,  (Cothren,  Vol  I,  p.  83.) 
Afterwards  he  removed  to  New  Milford,*  where  he  d.  about  1753.  His  will  was 
approved  Nov.  23,  1753,  in  which  is  mentioned  his  wife  Mercy  and  six  children. 
He  was  an  ensign,  and  his  first  wife's  name  was  Joanna,  who  joined  the  church  in 
Woodbury,  Dec.  7th,  1712.  His  son  Nathan,  of  New  Milford,  m.  Hannah,  d.  of 
John  Bronson,  son  of  Isaac. 

5.  Benjamin.     He  lived  in  Durham. 

6.  Elizabeth;  b.  1680;  m.  (the  same  day  as  her  brother  Joseph)  Joseph 
Hickox,  son  of  Sergt.  Samuel,  deceased. 

7.  Mary  ;  m.  March  4,  1701-2,  Stephen,  son  of  Jolin  Welton,  1st,  and  d.  July 
18,  I7u9. 

8.  Abagail;  b.  in  Waterbury,  and  bap.  in  Farmington,  Nov.  7,  1686,  and  m. 
James  Williams.     They  both  lived  in  Hartford  in  March,  1722. 

9.  Joanna;  m.  Robert  Royce.     They  were  both  of  Wallingford,  Nov.  1722. 

10.  Ruth  ;  m.  Stephen  Hickox,  and  lived  in  Durham. 

THOMAS   HANCOX. 

He  was  an  early  settler  of  Farmington  and  one  of  the 
eighty-four  proprietors  of  1672.  He  was  one  of  the  first  thirty 
who    signed  the  Mattatuck  articles ;  but  was  dilatory  in  his 


*  He  is  stated,  erroneously,  in  the  extracts  from  Mr.  Griswold's  sermon,  in  Barber's  Con. 
Historical  Collections,  to  have  come  from  Windsor. 


148  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY. 

fence.  He  was  among  tlie  delinquents  whose  allotments  were 
condemned  by  the  act  of  Feb.  16S2-3  ;  but  he  subscribed  (June 
4,  1683)  to  the  new  conditions  imposed  by  that  act,  "reform- 
ed," and  was  restored  to  his  rights,  having  a  £100  propriety. 
I  cannot  find  that  he  did  anything  to  preserve  his  memory  in 
Mattatuck  ;  but  he  left  his  name  to  the  brook  and  meadows 
at  "Waterville.  His  house  and  home  lot  of  one  and  three  quar- 
ter acres  were  on  the  north  side  of  West  Main  street.  The  lot 
was  bounded  north  and  south  on  highway,  east  on  Thomas 
Newell  and  west  on  Kobert  Porter.  These  Hancox  sold,  to- 
gether with  other  lands  and  his  propriety  right,  in  Feb. 
1687-8,  to  Lieut.  Judd,  and  quit  the  town,  shaking  the  dust 
from  his  feet,  perhaps.  He  probably  left  about  the  time  of 
the  above  sale.  He  was  in  Farmington  Dec.  22d,  1688,  in 
Hartford  June,  1695,  and  in  Farmington,  (Kensington,)  again, 
Jan.  1720-21. 

Thomas  Hancox  m.  March  17,  1681-5,  Rachel  Leonard  of 
Springfield. 

Children : 

1.  Thomas;  b.  March  13,  1685-6,  and  lived  in  Hartford  and  Boston. 

2.  John ;  b.  Aug.  1,  1688,  and  lived  in  Springfield. 

3.  "William;  b.  March  1,  1690-91,  and  d.  1721. 

4.  Rachel;  b.  Feb.  7,  1692-3,  and  d.  1737. 

5.  Daniel;  b.  Jan.  1,  1694-5,  and  m.  June  4,  1724,  Rachel  Porter. 

6.  Mehitabel ;  b.  Dec.  4,  1698,  and  m.  Ebenezer  Barnes. 

HICKOX. 

The  planters  of  Waterbury  bearing  this  name,  Samuel  and 
Joseph,  are  supposed  to  have  been  brothers,  and  sons  of  Wil- 
liam Hickox  of  Farmington,  one  of  the  original  proprietors 
and  first  settlers  of  that  town.  The  latter  died  early.  The 
names  of  Samuel  and  Joseph  are  on  the  list  of  the  proprietors 
of  Farmington,  in  1672. 

SAMUEL    HICKOX. 

He  was  one  of  the  original  thirty,  and  is  believed  to  have 
been  a  member  of  the  first  company  that  came  to  our  town. 
He  was  one  of  the  assignees  of  the  first  Lidian  deed,  and  is 
named  in  all  the  fence  divisions  and  proprietors'  lists.  So  far 
as  appears,  he  never  once  halted  in  the  work  he  had  underta- 
ken.    He  lived  where  C.  B.  Merriman  now  resides,  having  a 


HISTORY    OF    AVATEKBURY.  149 

homo  lot  of  two  acres,  bounded,  in  March,  1690-91,  south  on 
liighway,  north  on  "highland,"  west  on  Joseph  Ilickox's 
heirs,  and  east  on  Benjamin  Barnes.  He  was  called  sergeant 
as  early  as  1686.  When  the  train-band  was  organized,  or  re- 
organized, after  the  resumption  of  the  colonial  government 
under  the  charter,  he  was  appointed  sergeant  and  was  ever  af- 
terwards known  as  Serg.  Samuel  Hickox.  He  held  different 
offices  by  appointment  of  the  grand  committee  and  proprie- 
tors— was  townsman  in  1682,  &c.  He  was  one  of  the  leading 
men  of  the  settlement,  and  died  at  his  post,  at  a  critical  time, 
when  men  of  the  right  stamp  could  be  poorly  spared.  His 
inventory  was  taken  Feb.  28,  1691—5,  amounting  to  £13-1, 
Children : 

1.  Samuel ;  b.  1669  ;  m.  April  16, 1690,  Elizabeth,  d.  of  John  Plumb  of  Milford. 
He  had  a  grant  of  land  from  the  proprietors  when  he  was  but  eighteen  years  old, 
"  three  acres  at  Pine  swamp  by  the  path  that  leads  to  the  saw-mill."  Jan.  20, 
1692,  he  had  two  acres  granted  "  on  the  side  of  chesnut  hill  near  to  his  boggy 
meadow  convenient  for  a  yard,"  (for  drying  cloth  ?)  He  lived  on  the  corner  of 
East  Main  and  Cherry  streets,  where  he  had  built  a  house  before  Sept.  1703. 
This  place,  bounded  west  on  Stephen  Welton  and  Samuel  Stanley,  north  on 
John  Bronson,  south  and  east  on  highway,  he  conveyed,  Jan.  26,  1705-6,  to  his 
brother  Thomas,  the  latter  having  built  him  a  barn  and  chimney  and  deeded  to 
him  sixteen  acres  of  land  at  Judd's  Meadow.  The  barn  and  chimney  were  proba- 
bly at  Judd's  Meadow,  where  Samuel  "had  set  his  house"  as  early  as  Dec.  21, 
1702,  and  where  he  was  certainly  living  before  December,  1705.  He  was  probably 
the  first  settler  of  Naugatuck.  He  erected  a  fulling-mill  on  Fulling-Mill  Brook  (so 
called  from  the  mill)  about  1709,  and  his  house  was  by  the  brook.  Some  of  his 
lands  "  ran  across  the  road  that  led  to  New  Haven." 

Samuel  Hickox  died  in  the  great  sickness,  June  3,  1713,  and  his  widow,  Oct.  17, 
1749.  They  had  ten  children,  six  of  whom  lived  to  be  married.  Ebenezer  and 
John  were  bachelor  proprietors.  The  first,  after  1741,  removed  to  Danbury  and 
Norwalk,  and  the  last,  before  July,  1720,  to  Durham. 

2.  Hannah;   b.  1671;  m.  John  Judd  of  Waterbury. 

3.  William;  b.  1673;  m.  about  1696,  Rebecca,  d.  of  Abraham  Andruss,  (1st,) 
and  d.  Nov.  4,  1737.  He  was  a  bachelor  proprietor  and  man  of  note — grand  juror, 
school  committee,  surveyor,  constable,  townsman,  (many  times,)  moderator  of 
town  meeting,  captain  m  1727,  and  deputy  in  1728.  He  was  always  known  by 
his  military  title.  He  Uved  where  the  church  of  the  First  Congregational  Society 
now  stands.  The  place  he  bought  of  Joseph  Hickox  (son  of  Joseph,  deed.)  of 
Woodbury,  May  17,  1699.  The  lot,  containing  two  acres,  was  bounded,  March 
12,  1704-5,  north  on  common  land,  south  on  highway,  east  on  a  house  lot  of  the 
heirs  of  Serg.  Hickox,  deed.,  west  on  a  house  lot  of  the  heirs  of  Phihp  Judd, 
deed.  The  house  lot  which  was  Philip  Judd's  he  afterwards  purchased.  Still 
later,  he  came  into  possession  of  three  quarters  of  his  father's  homestead.  In  Sept. 
1732,  for  £300,  he  deeded  all  to  Samuel  Camp,  son  of  Edward,  of  Milford,  seven 


150  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURT. 

acres,  with  the  house,  barn,  and  mill-house,  butted  east  on  land  of  Joseph  Smith, 
north  on  Samuel  Scott,  son  of  George,  west  on  Dea.  Clark,  south  on  highway,  re' 
serving  one  quarter  part  of  his  father's  lot  belonging  to  the  heirs  of  Thomas 
Hickox,  deed.,  and  reserving  also  "  twenty  foot  square  of  land  down  the  hill  near 
the  mill  house  as  it  is  stoned  out."  This  property,  with  the  same  reservations, 
Camp  (who  then  improved  it)  conveyed,  in  1736,  for  £185,  to  Dea.  Thomas  Judd. 
Capt.  William  Hickox  lost  three  sons  in  the  great  sickness  of  1713.  One  son 
only,  Capt.  Samuel,  survived  him  and  had  a  family.  His  will  bears  date  Jan.  4, 
1732-3.  Among  his  effects  were  Lewis,  a  negro  man  @  £140,  and  "  fillis  a  negro 
woman"  @  £100. 

4.  Thomas  ;  b.  1675  ;  m.  Mary,  daughter  of  Serg.  Isaac  Bronson,  and  d.  June  28, 
1728.  His  widow  married  Dea.  Samuel  Bull  of  Woodbury,  and  died  a  widow. 
March  28,  1694,  he  had  a  grant  of  land,  four  acres  for  a  house  lot,  on  the  west  side 
of  Carrington  Brook,  on  the  south  side  of  the  highway  to  Farmington  ;  but  he  does 
not  appear  to  have  built  on  it.  He  was  made  a  bachelor  proprietor  in  1699  ;  was 
grand  juror,  school  committee,  and  townsman,  at  different  times  ;  represented  the 
town  in  the  Legislature  two  sessions,  in  1722  and  1723,  and  was  appointed  a  deacon 
in  1724,  being  the  second  who  had  held  this  office  in  the  church.  He  is  called 
''  husbandman  "  in  a  deed.  His  residence  was  on  the  corner  of  East  Main  and 
Cherry  streets,  being  the  place  he  bought  of  his  brother  Samuel  in  1705-6.  He 
died  in  the  prime  of  Ufe,  much  regretted.  His  estate  was  valued  at  £1,251,  and  his 
homestead  at  £140. 

5.  Joseph  ;  b.  1678,  and  m.  Elizabeth  Gaylord.  He  was  accepted  as  a  bachelor 
proprietor,  March  26,  1699,  and  in  the  same  month  received  a  grant  of  land  "  on 
y*  east  side  of  y^  little  brook  buting  on  gorg  scott  hom  lot  being  a  triangle  peace 
betweiu  y«  highways  for  a  hous  lot  on  condition  y'  he  fence  and  improue  it  four 
yeirs  not  to  pregedis  y®  high  wayes  nor  hinder  y*  town  coming  to  y«  claypits." 
On  this  lot,  which  lay  between  North  Main  and  Grove  streets,  east  of  Andrew 
Bryan's  house,  Hickox  built  a  house,  which  he  deeded,  with  three  and  a  half  acres 
of  land,  to  John  Judd,  (1st,)  Nov.  5,  1714,  bounded  east,  west,  north  and  south,  on. 
highway.  He  obtained  the  office  of  "chimney  viewer"  in  1701  and  1703,  and 
begat  two  children,  Joseph  and  Hannah,  both  of  whom  (and  also  a  sister,  Ruth) 
were  living  in  1725-6.  Being  satisfied  with  what  he  had  done  for  Waterbury,  and 
having  made  fast  his  propriety  right,  he  quit  the  place,  going  to  Durham  with  the 
Gaylords,  where  he  died  in  1725.     He  was  a  carpenter. 

6.  Mary  ;  b.  1681  ;  m.  John  Bronson,  son  of  Isaac,  and  died  "  March  21,  1713." 

7.  Elizabeth;  bap.  Nov.  12,  1682;  m.  Dec.  1724,  John  Norton,  (of  Durham, 
previously  of  Saybrook  ?) 

8.  Stephen;  bap.  April  12,  1685,  and  m.  Ruth  Gaylord.  He  was  admitted  a 
bachelor  proprietor,  Jan.  7,  1705-6  ;  but  soon  caught  the  run-away  fever  and 
followed  his  brother  and  father-in-law  to  Durham,  thus  losing  his  bachelor  right. 
He  was  one  of  those  whose  feelings  were  hurt  that  the  proprietors  should  give 
away  their  lands  so  liberally,  he  having  a  small  interest  after  the  decease  of  his 
father.  His  death  took  place  before  1737-8.  He  had  sons  and  daughters,  Sam- 
uel, Stephen,  Ruth  Johnson  and  Sarah  Spelman. 

9.  Benjamin;  b.  1686.  He  was  "of  Stamford"  in  1715,  and  had  a  suit  in  the 
Superior  Court  at  Fairfield]  about  a  negro  boy,  Dunboy,  whom  he  claimed  and 
had  attached.     He  was  living  in  Norwalk  in  May,  1735. 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUEY.  151 

10.  Mercy  ;  bap.  April  8,  1689. 

11.  Ebenezer;  b.  1093.  He  chose,  ia  170Y,  his  brother  Wilham  his  guardian. 
He  was  in  Danbury  in  June,  1722. 

JOSEPH  HICKOX. 

I  suppose  him  to  have  been  younger  than  his  brother  Sam- 
uel. He  subscribed  the  articles  in  1674,  and  had  a  $60  allot- 
ment. He  was  early  in  Mattatuck,  but  was  not  there  in  "  a 
steady  way,"  I  conclude;  for  though  his  name  is  in  the  first, 
second  and  fourth  fence  divisions,  it  is  not  in  the  third.  He 
lived  next  west  of  his  brother  Samuel,  between  the  latter  and 
Philip  Judd,  having  a  lot  of  two  acres.  This  lot,  bounded 
north  on  common  land,  his  son  Joseph  sold  and  conveyed, 
May  17,  1690,  to  his  cousin  William  Hickox,  as  before  stated. 

Only  the  scantiest  memorials  remain  of  Joseph  Hickox, 
first.  He  was  the  first  proprietor  that  left  the  settlement,  (and 
the  first  that  died.)  He  removed  to  Woodbury,  (Sonthbury,) 
in  the  early  part  of  1686  ;  joined  the  church  there  May  2d, 
1686,  and  died  in  1687.  His  estate  amounted  to  £107  in  AVa- 
terbury  and  £100  in  Woodbury. 

JOHN  HOPKINS. 

His  grandfather,  John  Hopkins,  settled  at  Cambridge,  Mass., 
in  1631;  was  made  a  freeman  in  1635,  and  removed  to  Hartford, 
in  1636,  where  he  became  a  juror,  in  1643.  It  is  not  known 
what  relation,  if  any,  he  bore  to  Stephen  Hopkins,  who  came 
to  Plymouth,  Mass.,  in  1620,  or  to  Edward  Hopkins,  who  ar- 
rived at  Boston  in  1637,  afterwards  governor  of  Connecticut. 
He  could  not,  however,  have  been  a  near  relative  of  the  last. 
His  will  was  dated  in  1618,  and  the  inventory  of  his  estate 
taken  April  14,  1654.  He  left  a  widow  Jane,  who  after- 
wards married  Nathaniel  AVard,  and  two  children,  Stephen 
and  Bethiah.  The  last  married  Samuel  Stocking  of  Middle- 
town. 

Stephen  Hopkins,  the  father  of  John  of  AVaterbury,  made 
a  freeman  1656,  married  Dorcas,  daughter  of  John  Bronson, 
1st,  of  Farmington.  He  died  about  1689,  and  his  widow, 
May  10,  1697.  His  will  bore  date  Sept.  28,  1680,  and  his  in- 
ventory, (amounting  to  £591,)  Nov.  6,  1689.  His  children 
named  in  his  will,  were  : 


152  HISTOKY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

1.  John ;   2.  Stephen ;  b.  1665 ;  m.  Sarah,  d.  of  Lieut.  Thomas 

Judd  and  Hannah .     He  had  children,  Thomas,  Sarah  and 

Eachel,  and  d.  1T04.  3.  Ebenezer ;  b.  1669,  and  m.  Mary 
Butler,  d.  of  Samuel  of  Wethersfield,  Jan.  21,  1691.  4.  Jo- 
seph ;  m.  Hannah,  d.  of  Paul  Peck  of  Hartford,  April  27, 
1693.  5.  Dorcas;  m.  Jonathan  Webster,  May  11,  1681.  6. 
Mary  ;  m.  Samuel  Sedgwick. 

Jolm  Hopkins,  the  son  of  Stephen  of  Hartford,  came  to 
Mattatuck  to  tend  his  father's  mill.  The  mill  was  built  ap- 
parently in  1680,  and  John  probably  took  charge  of  it  at  that 
time.  He  did  not  however  become  a  proprietor  immediately. 
Perhaps  he  was  not  then  of  age.  His  name  is  not  on  either 
of  the  fence-division  lists,  so  frequently  referred  to.  The  fath- 
er had  a  house  lot  granted  him,  Feb.  5,  1680-81,  wdiich  was 
probably  intended  for  the  son.  The  latter  is  first  mentioned, 
Feb.  6,  1682,  (1682-3,)  when  Dea.  Lankton's  forfeited  allot- 
ments were  confirmed  to  him  by  the  committee.  He  was  then 
called  "  the  present  miller." 

Jolm  Hopkins  was  one  of  the  most  respected  and  influen- 
tial of  the  early  settlers  of  Waterbury.  He  ground  the  peo- 
ple's corn,  "  corn  being  suitable  to  grind,"  and  was  one  of  the 
youngest  of  the  original  proprietors.  He  subscribed  to  the  £60 
settlement  of  the  first  minister;  was  townsman  in  1692,  and 
several  times  afterwards;  constable  in  1702  ;  grand  juror  for 
two  years;  deputy  in  1704,  and  many  times  from  1708  to  1726; 
justice  of  the  peace  from  1725  to  1729,  inclusive.  He  held 
the  office  of  town  clerk  in  1713.  He  wrote  his  own  signature 
in  a  fair  hand  ;  but  his  chirography  was  generally  bad  and  his 
ink  poor,  making  the  records,  as  kept  by  him,  difficult  to  deci- 
pher. He  was  also  tavern  keeper  from  1712  to  1718,  inclusive, 
and  probably  earlier,  and  "ordinary  keeper"  in  1714  and 
1715.  He  obtained,  too,  military  honors  so  much  sought  for 
in  his  day,  being  sergeant  in  1714,  ensign  in  1715,  and  lieu- 
tenant in  1716.  After  the  latter  date,  he  was  known  as  Left. 
Hopkins.  When  the  new  meeting  house  came  to  be  seated 
in  1729,  he  was  one  of  the  revered  dignitaries  who  were  voted 
"  into  the  first  pew  at  the  west  end  of  the  pulpit." 

John  Hopkins'  house  lot  was  situated  on  the  corner  of  East 
Main  and  Bank  streets.     It  contained  two  acres,   and   was 


HISTOKY    OF   WATEEBURY.  153 

bounded,  Dec.  26,  1691,  north  and  west  on  higliway,  south  on 
Thomas  Warner,  and  east  on  common  land.  The  house  stood 
on  Main  street  a  little  east  of  the  lane  put  down  on  the  map  as 
Brook  street. 

John  Hopkins  was  a  large  landholder.  He  gave  away 
much  land  during  his  life  time  to  his  children,  hj  deed  ;  still, 
he  left  a  considerable  estate.  Pie  died  Kov.  ]632,  his  inven- 
tory amounting  to  £1,251,  15s.  His  wife's  name  was  Hannah 
,  and  their  children  were: 

1.  A  daugliter;  b.  Dec.  22d,  1684,  and  d.  Jan.  4,  1084-5— the  death  being  the 
first  recorded  in  the  town. 

2.  John;  b.  March  29,  1C8C;  bap.  in  Hartford  and  died  in  Hartford,  Dec.  5, 
1709. 

3.  Consider;  b.  Nov.  10,  1687;  ni.  Ehzabeth  Graham,  "  rehct  of  George  Gra- 
ham of  Hartford,"  and  died  in  Hartford  in  1726. 

4.  Stephen;  b.  Nov.  19,  1689,  and  died  1769.  He  received  "bachelor  accom- 
modations," in  1712;  was  townsman  in  1724  and  afterwards;  deputy  many 
times  after  1732  ;  special  agent  to  the  General  Court,  in  1737  and  1738,  &c.  He 
was  a  prominent  man  in  his  day.  His  house  was  near  the  west  corner  of  East 
Main  and  Mill  streets.  The  lot  his  father  bought  of  Richard  Porter  in  May,  1711, 
described  as  "  before  Thomas  Hickox's  house,  two  acres,  east,  west  and  north  on 
highway,  south  on  common  land."  In  Oct.  1713,  the  "town"  granted  to  Stephen 
Hopkins  one  and  a  half  acres,  (laid  out  as  two  acres,)  south  of  the  above  land,  and 
adjoining  to  it.  In  June,  1718,  the  father  deeded  to  the  son  his  two  acres,  on 
which  a  house  had  been  built,  valuing  both  to  him  at  £35.  Afterwards,  (Dec.  11, 
1729,)  the  latter  sold  the  house  and  lot  of  four  acres,  bounded  north,  south,  east 
and  west  on  highway,  to  Jonathan  Garnsey,  and  Garnsey  conveyed  it,  March 
19,  1735,  to  Thomas  Barnes. 

Stephen  Hopkins  I  suppose  to  have  assisted  his  father  in  the  care  of  the  mill. 
After  the  death  of  the  latter,  Stephen  and  Timothy,  executors  of  the  will  of  the 
deceased,  sold  out  the  mill  and  mill  lands,  the  deed  bearing  date  Jan.  1732-3.  About 
this  time,  probably,  (certainly  before  Oct.  7,  1734,)  Stephen  removed  to  Judd's 
Meadow,  locating  himself  on,  or  near,  the  New  Haven  road  and  Fulling  Mill 
Brook. 

5.  Timothy;  b.  Nov.  16,  1691,  and  d.  Feb.  5,  1748-9.*  He  had  a  bachelor 
right  granted  him  in  1715.  He  was  a  farmer;  was  called  "yeoman"  and  "hus- 
bandman," in  deeds,  and  had  much  to  do  with  pubhc  business.  He  was  on  seve- 
ral occasions,  constable,  seclectman,  grand  juror  and  moderator  of  town  meeting. 
He  was  justice  of  the  peace  from  1734  to  1742  inclusive,  and,  for  many  years, 
a  representative  to  the  General  Court.  He  obtained  military  distinction,  and  was 
made  a  captain  in  1732.  No  man  of  the  town  seems  to  have  had,  in  a  greater  de- 
gree, the  confidence  of  the  public. 

*  On  his  tombstone,  now  standing,  is  this  not  unfamiliar  verse : 
When  this  you  see, 
Then  think  on  me. 


154:  HISTOKY   OF   WATERBURY. 

Timothy  Hopkins,  after  his  marriage,  lived  with  his  father,  the  latter  having 
conveyed  to  him,  in  June,  1719,  by  deed,  one  half  of  the  house  and  homestead  of  two 
acres,  valuing  them  to  him  at  £40  advancement.  After  the  decease  of  the  father, 
the  son  became  the  owner  of  the  whole  ;  and  in  April,  1740,  added  to  it  the  lot  (with 
a  house)  adjoining  on  the  south,  two  and  three  quarter  acres,  bought  of  John  Pun- 
derson  of  New  Haven,  and  which  Punderson  purchased  of  James  Johnson,  bound- 
ed west  on  highway,  &c.  The  entire  lot,  then  called  four  and  a  half  acres,  the 
son  conveyed  "with  the  buildings,  fencings,  orcharding,"  &c.,  April  4th,  1743, 
to  Lieut.  John  Bronson,  for  £540  old  tenor,  bounded  southerly  on  Stephen  Upson, 
easterly  on  Jonathan  Baldwin's  home  lot,  &c. 

After  the  sale  of  his  homestead,  Capt.  Hopkins  appears  to  have  owned  a  house 
and  other  buildings  beyond  the  hmits  of  the  village,  out  East,  whither  he,  per- 
haps, removed. 

6.  Samuel;  b.  Dec.  27,  1693.     He  settled  in  West  Fpringfield. 

7.  Mary;  b.  Jan.  27,  1696-7;  m.  Samuel  Hickox. 

8.  Hannah ;  b.  April  23,  1699,  and  m.  Daniel  Porter,  2d. 

9.  ;  b.  at  same  date  as  the  last,  and  d.  an  infant. 

10.  Dorcas;  b.  Feb.  12,  1705-6,  and  m.  James  Porter. 

BENJAMIN  JONES. 

He  was  accepted  in  the  place  of  Jolm  Andruss,  and  was  not 
one  of  the  first  company  of  settlers.  His  name  is  first  mention- 
ed among  those  who  had  allotments  in  the  fourth  division  of 
fence,  about  1680-81.  But  little  is  known  of  him.  His  house 
and  lot  of  two  acres  were  on  the  west  side  of  Willow  street, 
south  of  William  Brown's  dwelling.  The  land  was  bounded, 
in  1687,  southwest  on  "a  great  lot,"  northeast  on  Thomas 
Judd's  land  and  highway,  westwardly  on  Ensign  Thomas, 
Judd's  land  and  eastwardly  on  highway.  He  removed  to  New 
Haven  about  1689,  where  he  bought  of  William  Johnson  of 
]^.  H.,  for  £50,  sixty-six  and  a  half  acres  of  land  at  a  place  on 
"  West  Side,"  (West  Haven,)  called  Shepherd's  Hill,  "  running 
to  a  highway  next  the  sea."  His  propriety  right  of  £100  was 
sold  by  his  son  Benjamin,  in  1715,  to  Dea.  Thomas  Judd,  for 
forty  shillings,  and  was  conveyed  by  the  latter,  in  April,  1717, 
to  his  son  William. 

Whence  Benjamin  Jones  came,  and  from  whom  he  de- 
scended, I  am  not  informed.  He  was  married  to  Hannah 
Spencer,  at  Milford,  May  2d,  1661,  and  had  a  son  Benjamin 
born  there,  in  June,  1662.  (S.  Judd.)  He  died  in  New  Haven, 
Dec.  30, 1690,  and  his  estate  was  settled  in  the  County  Court  of 
N.  H.  His  widow,  Hannah,  was  administratrix,  and  guardian 
of  the  only  child,  Benj  amin.     This  minor  son  was  not,  of  course, 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKT.  155 

the  one  born  in  Milford,  in  1662.   The  latter  must  have  died,  and 

another  been  born  having  the  same  name.     Isaac  Bronson  and 

Thomas  Judd,  smith,  took  an  inventory  of  the  deceased  man's 

estate  in  Waterburj. 

Benjamin  Jones,  2d,  had  born  in  New  Haven,  between 

1706  and  1722,  Benjamin,  Hannah,  Ruth,  Vinson,  Martha  and 

Ebenezer. 

JUDD. 

Thomas  Judd,  ancestor  of  the  Judds  of  New  England,  came 
from  England  in  1633  or  1631,  and  settled  first  in  Cambridge, 
near  Boston,  where  lands  were  granted  him  in  1634.  He  re- 
moved to  Hartford  in  1636  and  to  Farmington  about  1644, 
where  he  lived  till  1679,  and  buried  his  wife.  He  then  went 
to  Northampton  and  married  a  widow  Mason,  Avho  was  child- 
less and  had  a  good  estate.  There  he  died  Nov.  9,  1688.  He 
was  the  second  deacon  of  the  church  of  Farmington  and  a 
deputy  from  that  town  in  1657,  and  afterwards. 

His  children  were : 

1.  William,  and  2.  Elizabeth.  Both  of  them  were  born 
between  1633  and  1636,  but  it  is  uncertain  which  was  the  oldest. 
3.  Thomas  ;  b.  about  1738.  4.  John  ;  b.  about  1740.  He 
was  a  non-fulfilling  subscriber.  5.  Benjamin;  b.  about  1642 
— a  non-fulfilling  subscriber.  6.  Mary;  b.  about  1644;  m. 
June  1,  1662,  Thomas  Loomis  of  Windsor.  7.  Ruth  ;  b. 
1646-7,  m.  John,  son  of  John  Steele.  8.  Philip  ;  b.  1649  and 
baptized  Sept.  2,  1649.  9.  Samuel ;  b.  about  1653.  His  fath- 
er subscribed  the  articles  for  him  in  1674.  He  proposed  join- 
ing the  settlement  in  Mattatuck  and  had  allotments  of  fence 
in  the  first  and  fourth  divisions  ;  but  he  failed  at  the  critical 
time,  and  joined  his  father  in  Northampton,  where  he  died 
in  1721. 

William  Judd,  the  eldest  son  of  Dea.  Thomas  of  Farming- 
ton  and  the  father  of  Dea.  Thomas  of  Waterbury,  married 
Mary,  daughter  of  John  Steele,  March  30,  1658,  and  died  late 
in  1690,  leaving  an  ample  estate  of  £693.  His  inventory  was 
presented  to  Court,  Nov.  5,  1690.*     His  widow,  Mary,  died 

*  I  cannot  reconcile  these  dates,  taken  from  Mr.  Sylvester  Judd's  Genealogy  of  Thomas 
Judd,  with  an  entry  on  the  Farmington  record,  which,  under  date  of  March  20,  1690-91,  refers 
to  "  Thomas  Judd  son  of  William,  both  residents  of  Waterbury."  Perhaps  I  have  made  a  mis- 
take in  copying. 


156  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY. 

Oct.  27,  1718,  aged  about  eighty.  The  children's  births  are 
inferred  from  the  baptisms,  and  the  age  given  by  the  probate 
record.     Their  names  were  : 

1.  Mary  ;  b.  1658  ;  m.  Abel  Janes  of  Northampton.  2. 
Tliomas ;  b.  1662,  (baptized  Oct.  13, 1662.)  3.  John  ;  b.  1667, 
and  d.  in  Farmington,  1710,  leaving  three  children.  4.  Ea- 
ch el ;  b.  1770;  d.  unmarried,  1703.  5.  Samuel;  b.  1673;  m. 
Ann  Hart,  in  1710  and  Abigail  Phelps  of  Westfield,  in  1725. 
He  lived  in  Farmington,  had  children  and  died  1728.  6.  Dan- 
iel ;  b.  1675  ;  lived  in  Farmington  ;  m.  in  1705,  Mercy  Mitch- 
ell of  Woodbury  ;  d.  April  29,  1748,  having  had  eight  child- 
ren.    7.  Elizabeth  ;  b.  1678  ;  was  living  in  1718  unmarried. 

All  the  sons  of  Dea.  Judd  of  Farmington,  six  in  nnmber, 
signed  the  articles,  first  and  last ;  but  only  two  became  per- 
manent settlers  of  Waterbury. 

LIEUT.   THOMAS   JUDD. 

Thomas  Jndd,  the  second  son  of  Deacon  Thomas  of  Farm- 
ington, was  one  of  the  original  thirty.  He  subscribed  as 
Thomas  Judd,  Jr.  Afterwards,  when  his  son  Thomas  became 
proprietor,  he  was  known  as  Thomas  Judd,  Sen.,  and  finally  as 
Lieut.  Thomas  Judd.  He  was  one  of  the  first  company  of 
settlers,  and  discharged  promptly  all  his  obligations  as  a  plant- 
er. He  shirked  no  responsibility,  and  exposed  himself  to 
no  censure  or  rebuke.  He  was  one  of  the  assignees  to  whom 
the  first  Indian  deed  was  made  over,  in  Sept.  1677,  and  was  a 
grantee  in  the  other  and  later  Indian  deeds.  He  is  named  in 
the  first  division  of  fence,  and  was  one  of  the  committee  to 
lay  it  out,  Jan.  1677-8.  He  had  a  like  interest  and  a  like 
agency  in  the  other  divisions.  After  his  brother  William 
abandoned  the  settlement,  he  was  more  than  any  other  single 
person  the  leading  man  of  the  infant  town.  He  was  general- 
ly named  by  the  grand  committee  as  one  of  the  persons  who 
were  to  act  in  their  absence,  in  certain  emergencies.  In  the 
discharge  of  his  duties  as  committee,  John  Stanley  was  usu- 
ally associated  with  him.  Judd's  name  was  nearly  always  men- 
tioned first,  in  part,  perhaps,  because  he  was  older  than  Stanley. 

Thomas  Judd  lived  on  the  north  side  of  West  Main  street, 
next  east  of  John  Bronson,  his  lot  of  two  and  one  quarter 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY.  157 

acres,  extending  tlirono-h  to  the  back  street,  bonnded,  in  Nov. 
1G87,  easterly  on  Daniel  "Warner,  westerly  on  John  Bronson, 
&c.  After  his  death,  his  son  Tliomas  took  the  old  home- 
stead. 

Thomas  Jndd  was  one  of  the  patentees  in  the  first  town 
]3atent.  lie  was  called  sergeant  in  1682  and  afterwards,  and 
occasionally  ensign,  (in  copied  records,)  in  1686, 1687  and  1688. 
After  Andros  had  abandoned  the  government,  and  the  Water- 
bury  train-band  became  entitled  to  a  lieutenant,  John  Stanley 
received  the  commission  of  lieutenant,  and  Judd  that  of 
ensign.  Why  this  precedence  was  given  to  Stanley,  the  junior 
in  age,  I  am  unable  to  say,  unless  he  had  some  important  ad- 
vantage over  his  friend  in  military  bearing.  However,  Judd 
was  compensated.  He  was  the  first  deputy  to  the  General 
Court,  (in  May,  1689,)  and  was  often  reelected  to  the 
oifice.  He  was  the  first  commissioner  of  the  town,  and  was 
continued  in  ofiice  till  a  law  was  passed  requiring  at  least 
three  or  four  justices  of  the  peace  in  each  county.  He  was 
then,  (in  1699,  or  earlier,)  appointed  the  first  justice  of  the 
peace — a  great  honor  ;  and  was  annually  reappointed  till  his 
death.  In  1696,  after  Lieut.  Stanley  had  removed  to  Farm- 
ington,  he  was  promoted  to  a  lieutenancy,  the  highest  military 
office  allowed  in  the  town,  till  1716.  No  doubt  he  bore  him- 
self gallantly. 

Lieut.  Judd  died  Jan.  10,  1702-3,  "  in  the  sixty-fifth  year 
of  his  age,"  at  a  time  when  his  assistance  and  counsel  were 
much  needed.  His  sons  John  and  Thomas  were  administra- 
toi-s,  and  the  inventory  of  his  estate,  amounting  to  £407,  bore 
date  Jan.  30,  1702-3.  His  wife,  Sarah,  daughter  of  John 
Steel  of  Farmington,  died  May  22,  1695,  in  ''  the  fifty-seventh 
year  of  her  age."  They  were  both  members  of  Mr.  Hooker's 
church  in  Farmington,  in  1680. 

Children : 

1.  Thomas;  born  probably  in  1663. 

2.  John.  He  received  a  grant  of  land  as  early  as  1689-90 — four  acres — to  be 
his  on  condition  that  he  remained  four  years  in  the  town ;  but  his  name  is  rarely 
mentioned  till  after  1700.  He  was  not  a  bachelor  proprietor,  it  not  being  the 
practice  to  admit  as  such  any  person  who  had  come  into  possession  of  another's 
right,  by  inheritance  or  otherwise ;  but  in  virtue  of  the  right  of  his  father  which 
was  distributed  to  him,  he  had  an  addition  of  two  forty  pound  rights.     He  was 


158  HISTOKY    OF   WATEEBUET. 

surveyor  in  1703  ;  grand  juror  in  1705 ;  townsman  in  1706 ;  town  collector  in  1707  ; 
town  treasurer  in  1712,  &c.  In  Dec.  1713,  he  was  appointed  town  clerk,  which 
office  he  held  till  his  death.  His  chirography  is  atrociously  bad — worse  even 
than  that  of  his  immediate  predecessors  in  office.  His  last  record  was  a  part  of 
a  deed  from  himself  to  John  Welton,  dated  and  acknowledged  May  5th,  1717. 
The  record  was  finished  by  his  successor,  William  Judd.  His  decease  took  place 
in  the  latter  part  of  1717,  (N.  S.)  The  inventory  of  his  estate,  amounting  to  £305, 
was  taken  Jan.  3, 1717-18.  Capt.  Thomas  Judd  was  guardian  of  the  four  young- 
est children,  in  1720. 

John  Judd  had  a  house  and  hous6  lot  of  one  acre  and  a  half  which  he  obtained 
by  exchange,  March  4,  1704,  of  John  Warner,  bounded  east  on  Jonathan  Scott's 
house  lot,  north,  south  and  west  on  highway.  This  he  exchanged,  Nov.  5,  1714, 
with  Joseph  Hickox  of  Durham,  said  Hickox  conveying  to  him  a  house  and  lot  of 
three  and  a  half  acres,  lying  between  Cook,  Grove  and  North  Main  streets,  butted 
north,  south,  east  and  west  on  highways,  where  I  suppose  Judd  afterwards  lived. 

3.  Sarah  ;  m.  Nov.  17,  1686,  Stephen  Hopkins,  Jr.,  of  Hartford.  Her  death  is 
recorded  in  Waterbury  as  having  taken  place  May  11,  1693,  in  the  twenty-eighth 
year  of  her  age.     She  left  a  son,  Thomas,  and  two  daughters. 

PHILIP   JUDD. 

He  was  tlie  sixth  son  of  Dea.  Tliomas  Judd,  and  m,  Han- 
nah, d.  of  Thomas  Loomis  of  Windsor.  Not  much  is  known 
of  him.  He  subscribed  the  articles  June  13,  1687,  (having  al- 
ready— in  1686 — received  some  land  grants,)  being  accepted 
in  the  place  of  his  brother  Samuel.  He  signed  the  agreement 
with  Mr.  Peck,  in  1689,  and  died  soon  after.  His  death  oc- 
curred before  the  expiration  of  the  four  years  required  by  the 
articles  of  settlement,  thus  securing  his  right  to  his  family. 
He  was  the  first  of  the  original  projjrietors  who  died  in  Wa- 
terbury. Ensign  Thomas  Judd  and  Thomas  Judd,  smith,  ad- 
ministered on  his  estate.  His  inventory,  taken  Nov.  2,  1689, 
amounted  to  £237  in  Waterbury,  and  £92  in  FarmingtoU' 
He  was  much  in  debt.  The  family  removed  from  Waterbury, 
and  the  children  all  settled  in  Danbury. 

Philip  Judd's  house  lot  of  two  acres  ("  y*  fell  to  him  by  alot" 
ment")  was  on  the  north  side  of  West  Main  street,  next  west 
of  Joseph  Hickox's  home  lot,  and  was  bounded,  March  27, 
1708,  west  on  Obadiah  Eichards,  deed.,  east  on  William  Hick- 
ox, north  on  common,  south  on  highway,  (no  house  mentioned 
at  this  date.)  The  lot  was  sold,  Nov.  1711,  by  Benjamin  Judd, 
son  of  Philip,  to  William  Hickox,  for  £8, 10s.,  butted  north  on 
George  Scott's  land,  and  on  the  other  sides  as  described  above. 


DISTORT   OF   WATERBDET.  159 

Cliildren  : 

1.  Philip  ;  baptized  in  Farmington,  March  13,  1680-81.  He  settled  in  Danbury 
(Bethel  Society,)  and  died  between  1760  and  1Y65,  leaving  children. 

2.  Thomas  ;  baptized  May  27,  1683,  and  died  young. 

3.  Hannah  ;  baptized  in  F.  Oct.  19,  168-i,  and  married  Thomas  Hoyt  of  Dan- 
bury.     They  were  both  living  in  April,  1721. 

4.  William  ;  baptized  in  F.  July  3,  1687.  He  mar.  Dec.  23,  1709,  Mary,  daugh- 
ter of  Thomas  Gridly  of  Farmington,  where  he  had  two  daughters,  Eunice  and 
Elizabeth,  born  in  1710  and  1712-13.  He  removed  thence  first  to  Waterbury 
then  to  Danbury.  He  was  in  the  former  place  in  1710  and  in  the  latter  in  1717 
and  1720.  He  appears  to  have  been  the  "William  Judd,  tailor,"  of  the  Waterbury 
records. 

5.  Benjamin;  bap.  in  F.  May  4,  1690.  He  was  living  in  Danbury  in  1711  and 
1727.  He  became  the  owner  of  his  father's  £80  propriety  and  sold  it  to  Timothy 
Hopkins. 

THOMAS  JUDD,  THE  SOX  OF  WILLIAM. 
His  name  is  first  mentioned  in  the  Waterbniy  records, 
Dec.  31,  1685,  when  he  had  a  grant  of  land  from  the  pro- 
prietors "  on  ye  north  sid  of  his  hous  lot  to  bute  on  John 
Sconels  thre  acre  lot."  This  house  lot  was  one  of  two  acres 
on  Willow  Street,  north  of  John  Scovill's,  which  had  been 
granted  to  his  father  and  forfeited,  and  then  bestowed  on 
the  son.  It  is  recorded  as  a  part  of  the  estate  of  the  latter, 
nnder  date  of  December  2G,  1691,  which  was  granted  by  the 
committee.  He  is  next  mentioned,  Jan.  3,  1686,  (1686-T,) 
and  again  March  27,  1687,  and  again  Sept.  29,  1687.  His 
name  is  on  the  list  of  proprietors  of  1688,  and  he  was  again 
grantee  of  the  town  Jan.  21,  1689,  (1689-90,)  and  again  Jan. 
29,  1690,  (1690-91.)  At  the  latter  date,  he  received  twenty 
acres  of  upland  and  other  lands,  with  the  customarj^  provision, 
that  he  build  a  house  and  comply  with  the  conditions  of  the 
articles.*  March  20,  1690-91,  he  joined  the  church  in  Far- 
mington, and  is  described  as  of  Waterbury.  Sej)t.  23,  1690, 
he  was  chosen  brander  of  the  town,  he  to  keej)  a  record  of  the 
horses  branded.  March  15,  1691,  he  had  a  division  of  upland, 
and  Jan.  20,  1692,  (1692-3,)  a  grant  on  Burnt  Hill.  May  17, 
1691,  the  town  appointed  him  to  stake  out  a  grant  to  John 
Richards. 


*  The  provision  in  this  and  other  cases  is  not  always  sufficient  evidence  that  the  requirements 
of  the  articles  as  to  building,  &o.,  had  not  already  been  complied  with.  It  seems  often  to  have 
been  inserted  as  a  kind  of  form,  and  as  a  matter  of  safety  should  any  dispute  arise. 


160  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 

The  above  items,  with  the  dates,  I  have  given  for  the  pur- 
pose of  showing  that  Tliomas  Judd,  the  son  of  William,  was  a 
resident  of  Waterbury  from  the  latter  part  of  1685  to  May, 
1694:,  in  something  like  "  a  steady  way."  Why  he  was  not 
a  subscriber  to  Mr,  Peck's  £60  settlement  in  1689-90,  (as  he 
ought  to  have  been,)  I  am  unable  to  say.  That  he  was  a  pro- 
prietor during  all  this  time  there  seems  no  sufficient  reason  to 
doubt.  This  would  appear  from  his  name  being  entered  in 
the  list  of  proprietors  of  1688,  and  from  a  record  of  seven  par- 
cels of  land  made  in  Jan.  1688-9,  and  Dec.  26,  1691,  which 
lands  were  "  granted  him  by  the  committee."  The  last  par- 
cel, recorded  under  the  last  mentioned  date,  was  "  a  hous  lote 
of  too  acrs  granted  to  his  father  as  the  aboue  mentioned  per- 
cels  [the  other  six]  were  and  after  forfitur  to  him."  At  the 
last  named  date,  too,  he  had  a  house  lot  of  three  quarters  of 
an  acre,  on  which  his  dwelling  house  stood,  on  the  south  side 
of  West  Main  street,  corner  of  Willow,  butted  north  and  east 
on  a  highway,  south  on  the  heirs  of  Benjamin  Jones. 

Adopting  the  conclusion  that  Thomas  Judd,  the  son  of 
William,  was  made  a  proprietor  before  1688,  receiving  his 
father's  forfeited  allotments,  and  that  he  had  fulfilled  the  con- 
ditions of  the  articles  and  secured  his  right  before  the  record 
of  Dec.  26,  1691,  I  have  been  much  perplexed  with  the  fol- 
lowing entry,  made  in  the  Proprietors'  Book  by  Tliomas  Judd, 
Jr.,  and  then  copied  by  the  same  hand  into  the  first  volume 
of  Land  Records  : — 

Att  a  town  meeting  in  mattatock  february  25:  1695  the  town  granted  to 
Thomas  Judd  soon  of  willyam  judd  y«  a  lot  ment  formerly  granted  to  y«  aboue  s** 
willyam  Judd  prouided  he  com  and  inliabit  four  vers  in  a  settled  or  steady  way 
from  ye  first  of  may  next  ensueing  with  the  six  acers  granted  for  pastor  excepted. 

However  difficult  to  conceive  it,  I  am  persuaded  there  is  a 
mistake  in  the  date  of  this  record.  Were  the  considerations 
already  offered  insufficient  to  prove  it,  we  might  find  in  the 
record  itself  good  ground  for  suspicion.  Waterbui-y  was 
never  called  Mattatuck  after  the  town  was  incorporated  in 
1686,  unless  by  mistake  ;  and  a  mistake  would  not  be  likely 
to  occur  eight  years  after  a  change  of  name.  Besides,  there 
is  no  evidence  that  Judd  had  left  town  so  that  he  could  have 


JK,22y.fi;.>aa:N.Y. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY,  161 

been  properly  invited,  in  1695,  "  to  come  and  inhabit  fonr 
years,"  &c.  I  am  persuaded,  therefore,  that  the  record  quoted 
above  should  bear  the  date  Feb.  25,  1685,  (1685-6.) 

In  the  extract  below,  Thomas  Judd,  son  of  "William,  is  first 
called  deacon : — 

Att  a  town  meeting  in  waterbury  march:  2Y  1696  y®  town  gaue  liberty  to  deac 
judd  for  ye  enlarging  of  his  shop  to  make  use  of  six  foots  of  y^  highway  at  y^ 
east  end  of  his  shop  so  long  as  he  improue  it  for  y'  end 

According  to  his  tombstone,  he  was  the  first  deacon  of  tlie 
Waterbury  church.  He  was  tliirty-three  years  old  in  1695, 
(the  date  of  his  probable  appointment,)  and  the  fact  that  he  was 
selected  at  that  early  period  of  life  for  so  responsible  a  posi- 
tion, with  no  associate  in  ofiice  for  twenty-nine  years,  is  a  high 
tribute  to  the  general  good  qualities  of  his  head  and  heart. 

The  merits  of  Dea.  Judd  seem  to  have  been  in  a  measure 
unknown  until  about  the  time  he  was  made  an  oflicer  in  the 
church.  After  that,  and  particularly  after  the  death  of  Lieut. 
Judd,  no  other  man  in  the  town  received  such  substantial  evi- 
dence of  the  people's  confidence  and  regard.  He  was  many 
times  townsman,  school  committee,  rate-maker,  &c.  In  Oct, 
1696,  he  was,  for  the  first  time,  deputy  to  the  General  Court, 
being  associated  with  Lieut.  Judd,  Afterwards  he  was  often 
the  associate,  in  the  town's  representation,  of  Lieut.  Judd, 
Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  or  schoolmaster,  Lieut.  Timothy  Stanley, 
Lieut.  John  Hopkins,  Serg.  Stephen  Upson,  and  others,  till 
1733.  After  Lieut.  Judd's  decease  he  was  made  a  justice  of 
the  peace,  which  ofiice  he  held -by  annual  ap2:)ointment  till 
1729.  During  this  time,  he  w^as  the  sole  justice  for  Waterbury 
till  1725.  He  was  one  of  the  receivers  appointed  by  the  Gen- 
eral Court,  in  1703,  of  funds  collected  for  the  Saybrook  school. 
When  the  ofiice  of  town  clerk  was  made  vacant  by  the  re- 
moval of  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  the  deacon  was  chosen  (April  26, 
1709)  to  fill  the  place.  He  filled  it,  in  a  very  poor  way,  jtill 
Dec.  1712.  Writing  (to  say  nothing  of  spelling)  was,  with 
him,  the  gift  (better  say  infiiction)  of  nature. 

Dea.  Thomas  Judd  was  also  a  military  man,  and  a  very  gal- 
lant one  too,  it  is  safe  to  say.  He  was  made  an  ensign  after 
Lieut.  Judd's  decease,  in  1702-3,  and  held  the  place  under 
Lieut.  Timothy  Stanley  till  1715.     He  was  then  promoted  and 

11 


162 


HISTOKY    OF   WATEEBURY. 


became  the  first  captain  of  tlie  Waterbuiy  traiu-band,  tlie 
number  of  soldiers  having  readied  sixty-fonr,  thus  giving 
the  town  the  right  to  a  captain. 


He  branded  horses  and  hammered  iron,  in  a  rough  way,  for  the 
settlers.  His  "  deal  post"  was  a  place  for  public  advertise- 
ments. A  record  made  by  himself,  1709-10,  says — "the 
decons  deal  porst  is  to  be  estemd  a  sine  porst  for  sad  town." 
He  was  usually  called  "  smith,"  or  the  "  son  of  William,"  till 
he  became  a  deacon,  and  "  deacon  "  till  he  was  made  a  cap- 
tain, and  "  captain  "  the  remainder  of  his  life.  Occasionally, 
after  the  death  of  Lieut.  Judd,  and  particularly  in  legal  docu- 
ments, he  is  termed  "  senior  "  or  "  smith,"  to  distinguish  him 
from  his  cousin  of  the  same  name. 

Capt.  Judd,  April  1,  1717,  in  consideration  of  lands  at  Great 
Swamp,  conveyed  to  his  only  son  "William,  his  house  and  all 
his  lands  in  Waterbury,  except  the  divisions  on  the  £100 
propriety  he  bought  of  Jones.  After  this,  he  appears  to 
have  lived  with  his  son  many  years;  but  Oct.  19,  1736,  he 
purchased  for  £185  of  Samuel  Camp  the  place  which  Camp 
bought  of  Capt.  William  Hickox,  six  acres,  with  certain  re- 
servations, where  the  house  of  C.  B.  Merriman  now  stands. 
Here  Capt.  Judd  perhaps  lived  for  a  season  ;  but  in  1739,  he 
sold  out  to  Kev.  Mark  Leavenworth,  for  £250. 

Thomas  Judd  was  married,  Feb.  9, 1687-8,  to  Sarah,  daugh- 
ter of  Stephen  Freeman,  first  of  Milford,  then  of  N'ewark, 
IST.  J.  He  died  full  of  years  and  honors.  'Near  the  northwest 
corner  of  the  old  burying  yard,  a  gravestone  is  standing  on 
which  may  be  read,  with  some  difliculty,  the  following 
inscription  : — 


the 
first 


Here  [lies] 

the  body  of 

THOMAS  JUDD,  ESQ. 

Justice 
Deacon  & 
1^  Captain 
in  Waterbury, 
who  died  Jan'y 
ye  4th  A.  D.  llil 
aged  '79. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBUKY.  163 

On  tlie  next  stone  close  by,  is  another  inscription  witli  these 
words  :  "  Sarah  Judd,  wife  of  Deac.  Thomas  Jndd,  dyed  Sept. 
8,  1T38,  in  y^  69th  year  of  her  age." 

There  are  two  errors  in  Dea.  Jndd's  inscription.  He  was 
not  the  first  bnt  the  second  justice,  liis  uncle,  Lient.  Judd, 
being  the  first ;  and  he  was  several  years  older  than  is  stated. 
He  must  have  been  about  85.  The  inventory  of  his  estate 
amounted  to  £2,279,  10s.  lOd.,  being  nominally  larger  than 
that  of  any  inhabitant  of  Waterbury  who  had  died  before  him. 
The  currency,  however,  at  this  period  was  much  depreciated. 
The  silver  headed  cane  of  Captain  Judd  is  now  in  the  posses- 
sion of  his  descendant,  Mr.  Sylvester  Judd  of  Northampton. 

Children  : 

1.  William ;  b.  May  7,  1689  ;  bap.  in  Farmington,  April  5,  1691,  and  m.  Jan. 
21,  1712-13,  Mary,  d.  of  Stephen  Root  of  Farmington,  where  he  settled,  at  the 
Great  Swamp,  so  called,  (Kensington,  now  Berlin.)  About  1715,  he  returned  to 
Waterbury,  was  made  a  £40  proprietor,  and  received  a  special  grant  out  of  the 
common  lands,  "he  to  fence  for  it."  His  father  deeded  to  him,  in  1717,  his 
house  and  homestead,  on  the  corner  of  Willow  street,  now  occupied  by  John  S. 
Kingsbury,  where  they  both  lived  for  many  years.  In  1735,  however,  April  12th, 
the  son,  in  the  way  of  exchange,  conveyed  all  "  his  lands  and  buildings  in  the 
stated  hne  of  the  common  fence,"  (the  place  where  he  lived  being  included,)  to 
Ebenezer  Bronson,  and  removed  to  Westbiiry,  where  he  d.  Jan.  29,  1772.  His 
farm  lay  in  the  southwest  corner  of  the  society,  its  southern  border  forming  the 
boundary  line.  His  first  wife  d.  Dec.  11,  1751,  having  had  nine  children.  He 
then  married  Widow  Hope  Lee,  who  survived  him.     Estate  £579,  10s. 

William  Judd,  after  his  return  from  Farmington,  soon  became  more  or  less  of  a 
pulilic  man,  and  repeatedly  occupied  posts  of  honor  and  responsibility.  He  was 
constable  in  1718,  1719  and  1728;  townsman  in  1722,  1723  and  afterwards; 
school  committee  in  1730;  deputy  in  1729,  1730,  1731,  1736  and  1739  ;  moderator 
of  town  meeting,  1738-9  and  1753,  &c.  After  the  decease  of  John  Judd,  in  1717, 
he  was  chosen  town  clerk,  and  continued  to  discharge  the  duties  of  the  office  till 
Dec.  1721,  when  Mr.  Southmayd  was  appointed.  He  was,  so  far  as  appears,  a 
competent  and  acceptable  clerk.  His  penmanship  is  a  great  improvement  on  that 
of  his  immediate  predecessors.  In  1730,  he  reached  the  goal  of  military  ambition 
and  became  a  captain. 

2.  Martha  ;  b.  Sept.  11,  1692  ;  m.  1714,  Thomas  Cowles  of  Farmington,  and  d. 
1768. 

3.  Rachel ;  b.  Nov.  13,  1694 ;  m.  Thomas  Upson,  son  of  Stephen,  and  d.  July 
19,  1750. 

4.  Sarah  ;  b.  April  23,  1697 ;  d.  Nov.  3,  1725  or  1726. 

5.  Hannah;  b.  July  2,  1699,  and  d.  "March  12,  1713." 

6.  Mary ;  b.  Jan  30,  1701  ;  m.  Timothy  Hopkins. 

Y.  Elizabeth;  b.  July  23,  1704;  m.  John  Upson,  son  of  Stephen. 


164  HISTOKY    OF   WATEKBUEY. 

8.  Ruth  ;  b.  May  9,  1*707;  m.  April  26,  ll2l,  James  Smith  of  Farmington,  and 
d.  1786. 

9.  Stephen;  b.  Nov.  30,  1709,  and  d.  June  23,  1715. 

THOMAS  JUDD,  Jr. 

He  was  tlie  son  of  Lient.  Thomas  Judd,  and  was  accepted 
by  the  committee  as  a  proprietor,  at  the  desire  of  his  father, 
Jan.  10,  1683,  (1683-4,)  with  £100  right.  His  name  is  rarely 
mentioned  for  several  years,  except  as  the  grantee  of  certain 
lands.  It  is  fonnd,  however,  among  the  proprietors  of  16S8, 
and  the  subscribers  to  Mr.  Peck's  settlement,  in  1689.  He  was 
John  Stanley's  successor  as  register  or  town  clerk,*  being 
appointed  June  4,  1696 — a  compliment  to  his  penmanship,  as 
well  as  his  general  respectability.  He  retained  the  office  till  his 
removal  from  the  town.  He  was,  I  imagine,  in  his  mature 
years,  the  literarj^  oracle  of  the  settlement.  He  wrote  a  very 
good,  business-like  hand,  which,  with  some  practice,  is  read 
with  little  difficulty.  He  was  townsman  in  1698,  1Y03  and 
1704;  town  treasurer  in  1699  and  1700,  and  constable  in  1700.t 
After  the  death  of  his  father,  lie  represented  the  town  in  the 
General  Assembly,  first  in  Oct.  1704,  and  then  in  the  three 
succeeding  October  sessions.  In  these  instances,  with  one 
exception,  his  name  is  entered  as  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  to  distin- 
guish him  from  his  colleague,  Thomas  Judd,  the  son  of  Wil- 
liam, he  being,  I  suppose,  a  little  younger  than  his  consin, 

I  suppose — but  cannot  prove  it — that  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  was 
the  schoolmaster  of  Waterbury — that  he  taught,  or  tried  to 
teach,  the  juveniles  of  the  village,  intellectual  archery.  I 
suppose  so  from  the  fact  that  he  calls  himself  schoolmaster,  in 
certain  deeds,  very  soon  after  his  removal  from  "Waterbury, 
where  he  had  spent  his  whole  previous  adult  life.  But  his 
teachings  could  have  been  but  moderately  successful.  The 
urchin  archers  of  liis  day  were  not  all  apt  scholars,  idea-shoot- 
ing being  a  rather  dull  business,  judging  from  their  literary 
accomplishments  when  grown  to  manhood. 

Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  lived  on  West  Main  street,  on  the  south 


*  The  town  clerk  was  always  proprietors'  clerk  until  a  comparatively  recent  period, 
t  The  town  officers  were  appointed  In  December  for  the  ensuing  year  ;  and  when  I  speak  of 
the  time  that  a  person  held  an  office,  I  generally  refer  to  the  date  of  his  appointment. 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBURY.  165 

side,  his  being  tlie  foiirtli  lot  east  from  the  corner  of  "Willow 
street.  It  contained  two  acres,  and  butted,  Nov,  1687,  north 
and  south  on  higliway,  east  on  Edmund  Scott,  Jr's  land,  west 
on  John  TVelton's  land.  He  sold  the  place,  April  1,  1701,  to 
Robert  Scott,  and  Scott  sold  it,  with  the  same  boundaries,  Oct. 
7,  1708,  to  his  brother  Edmund,  "  for  a  mare  and  Colt  and 
£5, 12s."  After  his  father's  decease,  in  1702-3,  he  became  the 
owner  and  occupant  of  the  old  homestead,  recorded,  in  June, 
1705,  as  containing  five  acres,  east  on  Obadiah  Richard's  house 
lot,  west  on  the  heirs  of  John  Bronson,  deceased,  &c.  He 
ajjpears  to  have  been  one  of  the  most  respectable  men  of  the 
town ;  but  after  having  battled  with  adversity  for  twenty-five 
years,  he  turned  his  back  upon  his  friends  and  quit  the  settle- 
ment. He  removed  in  the  early  part  of  1709,  (^N".  S.,)  and 
settled  first  in  Farmiugton,  (where  he  lived  in  1712,)  and  then 
in  Hartford,  (in  the  part  called  "West  Hartford,)  residing  near 
the  boundary  line. 

The  wife  of  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  was  Sarah,  danghter  of 
Joseph  Gaylord,  Sen.  They  were  married  April  11,  1688,  by 
Mr.  Zachariah  "Walker,  Sen.,  of  "Woodbury.  He  joined  the 
church  of  Farmiugton,  July  20,  1690,  where  he  had  two 
children,  Thomas  and  Sarah,  baptized  Oct.  12, 1690.  He  died 
Aug.  24,  1724.     His  wife  was  dead  in  Feb.  1724-25. 

Children  : 

1.  Thomas;  b.  March  28,  1690  and  m.  Hcpzibah  Williams. 

2.  Joseph  ;  )  j  d.  an  infant. 

3.  Sarah  ;    P"  ^''^-  "'  ^^^^'  I  m.  James  Williams. 

4.  Elizabeth  ;  b.  Oct.  18,  1695,  and  m.  Joshua  How. 

5.  Joanna;  b.  Sept.  12,  1698  ;  m.  William  Scott,  and  died  Jan.  25,  1771. 

6.  Joseph;  b.  April  21,  1701.  In  1726,  he  bought  a  house  and  lauds  of  Oba- 
diah Scott  in  Waterbury,  on  Buckshill,  where  he  settled. 

7.  Ebenezer ;  b.  March  3,  1702-3  ;  lived  in  West  Hartford,  and  d.  1734. 

8.  Mary ;  b.  April  2,  1706  ;  m.  Samuel  Moss  and  was  living  with  her  husband 
in  Wallingford,  in  1737. 

9.  Rachel;  b.  Oct.  4,  1708  ;  unmarried  in  1738. 

10.  Abagail ;  b.  1712,  and  m.  Joseph  Hall. 

JOSEPH  LEWIS. 
He    and  a  brother   John  were  sons  of  Joseph   Lewis  of 
"Windsor  and  Simsbury,  who  died  in  1706.     He  was  the  first 
man,  an  outsider  and  not  an  original  proprietor,  (if  we  except 


166  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY. 

Mr.  Peck's  sons,)  tliat  joined  the  settlement  of  Waterbnry. 
At  wliat  precise  time  he  came  I  have  no  means  of  knowing. 
His  name  is  first  mentioned  on  the  Town  Book,  Dec.  23,  1700, 
at  which  date  he  w^as  ajDpointed  one  of  the  fence  viewers. 
Had  he  been  in  the  town  much  earlier  than  1700, 1  think  I 
should  have  discovered  some  traces  of  him.  At  vfhat  period 
he  was  made  a  bachelor  proprietor  is  not  clear.  With  the 
exception  of  Thomas  Clark,  he  was  the  only  one  of  this  class 
of  proprietors  who  was  not  either  a  son  or  grandson  of  an 
original  proprietor.  He  settled  at  Judd's  Meadow,  on  the 
west  side  of  the  river,  where  he  owned,  from  an  early  date, 
much  land,  obtained  bj  division  and  by  purchase.  The  first 
reference  made  to  his  house  was  in  Dec.  1714.  He  had  doubt- 
less then  been  several  years  in  that  jiart  of  the  town.  His 
sons  took  up  their  residences  near  him.  To  Joseph,  he  gave, 
in  1728,  soon  after  marriage,  a  house  and  lands  near  the  Straits 
Mountain,  valuing  them  to  him  at  £150.  To  John  he  gave, 
in  1736,  under  similar  circumstances,  sixty  acres  of  land  with 
a  house,  estimating  them  "  at  £120  portion." 

Joseph  Lewis  was  one  of  the  respected  and  substantial  men 
of  the  town.  He  was  a  cloth  weaver  by  trade,  and  one  of  a 
committee  to  settle  the  bounds  of  Woodbury,  as  early  as  1706. 
He  was  appointed  to  a  similar  duty  in  1719,  and  again  in  1730. 
He  was  town  treasurer  in  1711,  and  many  years  selectman. 
He  was  the  town's  deputy  at  the  General  Court  for  fifteen 
sessions  between  1713  and  1741.  In  1724,  he  was  called  sar- 
geant,  and  early  in  1738,  was  chosen  the  fourth  deacon  of  the 
church,  Dea.  Judd  being  now  advanced  in  life.  In  his  will 
he  gave  to  the  church  (in  his  own  language)  "  twenty  six 
pounds  money  due  to  me  by  Mr.  Mark  Leavenworth  by  note 
of  hand,  which  I  give  to  y^  first  church  of  Christ  in  Water- 
bury  (now  under  the  pastoral  charge  of  y^  sd  Mr,  Leaven- 
woi-th)  to  be  to  y®  use  and  benefit  of  sd  church  for  ever."  His 
estate  w^as  larger  nominally  than  that  of  any  deceased  person 
of  Waterbury  which  had  previously  been  inventoried.  It 
amounted  to  £5,628, 12s.  6d.,  when  wdieat  sold  at  35  shillings 
or  so  per  bushel. 

Joseph  Lewis  died  in  the  fatal  year  of  1749,  (Nov.  29.) 
His  son  Joseph,  and  his  eldest  son  John's  wife,  died  but  a  few 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUKY.  167 

weeks  before  liim.  His  widow  Sarah  (Andrnss)  died  Marcli 
5,  1773.  His  son  Samuel  was  a  deacon  of  tlie  Waterbnry 
church,  and  afterwards  the  first  deacon  of  the  church  in  Salem, 
(Naugatuck.)  Another  son,  Thomas,  appears  to  have  gradu- 
ated at  Yale  College  in  1741,  being  a  classmate  of  Samuel 
Hopkins,  Jonathan  Judd  and  Daniel  Southmayd,  all  from 
Waterbury,  the  four  making  a  fifth  part  of  the  graduating  class. 
He  became  a  cono:rea:ational  minister. 


CHAPTER    XII. 


PERSONAL  NOTICES  OF  THE  FIRST  SETTLERS,  CONTINUED. 

NEWELL. 

Thomas  Newell,  (Sen.,)  was  one  of  the  original  settlers  of 
Farmington,  a  member  of  the  church,  a  freeman  in  1669, 
and  one  of  the  eighty-four  proprietors  of  1672.  He  married 
Rebecca,  a  niece  of  John  Ohnsted,  and  died  Sept.  13,  16S9, 
leaving  an  estate  of  £700.     His  widow  died  Feb.  24,  1697-8. 

Children : 

1.  Rebecca ;  b.  Jan.  1613,  and  m.  Joseph  or  Josiah  Wood- 
ford. 2.  Mary;  b.  March,  1645,  and  m.  March  20,  1667, 
Thomas  Bascomb  of  Northampton.  3.  John ;  b.  Jan.  1647. 
4.  Thomas;  b.  March,  1650.  5.  Hester;  b.  July,  1652,  m. 
John  Stanley  of  Waterbury.  6.  Sarah ;  bap.  Feb.  18,  1655, 
and  m.  "  Arter  "  Smith.  7.  Hannah,  or  Martha  ;  bap.  April 
14, 1658,  and  m.  Thomas  North.  8.  Samuel ;  bap.  Dec.  5, 
1660;  m.  Dec.  20,  1683,  Mary  Hart.  9.  Joseph;  bap.  April 
20,  1664,  and  d.  1689,  unmarried. 

Thomas  Newell,  Sen.,  was  one  of  a  preliminary  committee 
who  went  to  view  Mattatuck,  and  one  of  the  petitioners  for 
"  liberty  of  planting  y^  same,"  1673.     He  afterwards  signed 


16S  IIISTOKY    OF    WATERBUEY. 

the  articles,  taking  the  phice  of  Samuel  Gridley,  but  declined 
to  join  the  new  settlement. 

JOHN  XEWELL. 

He  (or  liis  father  for  him)  seems  to  have  been  one  of  the 
original  subscribers  of  1674,  the  name  being  written  "  Thomas 
ISTewell,  son,  £100."  He  was  one  of  the  earliest  settlers,  be- 
ing on  all  the  fence -division  lists.  He  had  a  house  and  house 
lot  on  North  Main  street,  next  to  Isaac  Bronson,  recorded, 
July  11,  1693,  as  five  acres  of  land,  north  on  John  Stanley 
and  Benjamin  Barnes,  east  on  common  land,  south  on  Isaac 
Bronson,  west  on  highway.  Newell's  hill,  a  part  of  his  home- 
stead, was  named  after  him.  If  he  did  anything  worthy  to 
be  remembered,  history  has  taken  no  note  of  it.  As  early  as 
Aug.,  1694,  he  had  removed  to  Farmington.  He  had  con- 
veyed, in  the  preceding  March,  his  house  and  homestead,  (then 
bounded  north  on  Richard  Porter  and  Benjamin  Barnes,)  to 
Isaac  Bronson.  He  died  in  1696,  Avithout  a  family,  his  broth- 
ers, Thomas  and  Samuel,  being  administrators. 

THOMAS  NEWELL,  (Jr.) 

He  seems  to  have  taken  the  right  of  £90  Avhich  his  father 
subscribed  for,  and  which  was  at  first  Thomas  Gridley's.  He 
did  not,  apparently,  go  to  Waterbury  as  early  as  his  brother. 
His  name  is  not  mentioned  in  the  first  fence-division,  but  it  is 
in  the  three  others.  He  was  among  those  whose  rights  were 
declared  forfeited  in  1682-3,  but  he  "  submitted  "  and  regain- 
ed his  propriety.  His  house  was  on  the  north  side  of  West 
Main  street,  next  east  of  Thomas  Hancox.  After  Hancox  left, 
he  bought  his  lot  (with  the  house)  of  Lieut.  Judd,  and  added 
it  to  his  own  lot  of  one  and  three  quarter  acres,  making  in  the 
whole  three  and  a  half  acres.  This  is  described  Jan.  6,  1690, 
(1690-91,)  as  bounded  east  on  John  Bronson  and  west  on  John 
Warner,  {Thomas  Porter^  son  of  Robert,  is  written  over  John 
Warner.) 

Thomas  E'ewell  subscribed  to  Mr.  Peck's  settlement  in  1689. 
Soon  after,  he  followed  the  bad  example  set  by  Joseph  Ilickox, 
Thomas  Hancox  and  Benjamin  Jones,  and  left  the  town.  He 
was  in  Farmington  ISTov.  6,  1690,  where  I  hope  he  made  him- 
self useful.     He  sold  his  homestead,  March  2d,  1692-3,  to 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUEY.  169 

Thomas  Ricliason  for  £G0.  Afterwards,  Isaac  Bronson  bought 
his  right  in  the  undivided  lands. 

He  married  E'ov.  5,  1679,  Elizabeth  Wrothern,  and  died 
Oct.  25,  1723.  His  widow  died  Jan.  S,  1730-40.  The  births 
of  the  children,  except  Susanna,  are  recorded  in  Farmington. 

Children  : 

1.  Thomas;  b.  Oct.  1,  1081.     lie  had  no  family. 

2.  Shnoii;  b.  April  1,  and  baptized  June  1,  1G83  ;  m.  Mehitable  Bird  and 
Mary  Walli.s. 

3.  Susanna;   bap.  April  24,  1G87,  and  d.  Sept.  24,  1704. 

4.  Joseph  ;  b.  Nov.  1,  1689.     He  lived  in  Southington. 

5.  Ehzabeth  ;  b.  Nov.  29,  1693.     She  m.  Jonathan  Lewis. 

6.  Sarah;  b.  Jan.  1,  1698. 

1.  Esther;  b.  Sept.  12,  17().5. 

Rev.  JEREMIAH  PECK. 

He  was  a  son  of  Dea.  William  Peck,  one  of  the  company 
that  made  the  first  settlement  in  New  Haven,  in  1G38,  and 
one  of  those  who  signed  the  fundamental  articles  in  1639. 
Dea.  Peck  was  chosen  deacon  in  1659,  and  was  one  of  the  trus- 
tees of  the  Grammar  School  for  many  years,  and  died,  leaving 
a  small  pi-operty,  in  Lyme,  Oct.  4,  1694,  aged  93.  In  his 
will,  dated  March  9,  1688-9,  he  names  as  his,  the  following 
children : 

1.  Jeremiah.  He  was  born  in  London  or  its  neighborhood. 
2.  Joseph,  He  was  baptized  in  New  Haven,  Jan.  17,  1641 ; 
settled  in  Saybrook  and  afterwards  in  Lyme.  3.  John.  He 
m.  Nov.  3,  1664,  Mary  Moss,  and  had  four  children,  born  in 
New  Haven.  He  removed  to  AVallingford.  4.  Elizabeth.  She 
m.  Samuel  Andrews,  and  appears  to  have  had  five  children 
born  in  New  Haven. 

Of  the  Pev.  Jeremiah  Peck,  the  first  minister  of  Water- 
bury,  I  shall  give  a  more  detailed  account  hereafter.  His 
house  and  house  lot,  given  him  by  the  town,  were  on  the  north- 
east corner  of  West  Main  street,  the  lot  being  bounded,  Feb., 
1693-4,  easterly  on  David  and  Robert  Scott,  east  on  Edmund 
Scott,  north,  south  and  west  on  highways. 

Mr.  Peck's  will,  (which  is  a  gift-deed,)  bearing  date  "  Jan. 
14,  1696,"  is  a  document  of  some  interest.  It  is  recorded  in 
the  first  volume  of  the  Waterbury  Land  Eecords,  page  6.  It 
enumerates  the  books    which  seem  to  have  constituted  his 


170  mSTOKY    OF   WATEEBUET. 

library.  They  are  sixteen  in  number,  all  of  them  of  a  relig- 
ious character.  His  house  and  house  lot  he  gave  to  his 
son  Jeremiah.  His  other  lands,  divided  and  undivided,  in 
Waterbury,  and  his  husbandry  implements,  he  gave  to  Jer- 
emiah and  Joshua,  they  to  provide  for  him  and  his  wife,  "  in 
sickness  and  health,  both  cloaths,  food  and  fisick,"  during 
life. 

The  widow  of  Mr.  Peck  lived  several  years  after  his  decease. 
I  find  her  will  recorded  in  the  first  volume  of  Land  Records, 
bearing  date  Oct.  7th,  1706.     It  reads  thus  : 

I  Joanna  Peck  y«  relict  of  Mr.  Jeremiah  Peck  give  [&c.]  to  my  daughter  anna 
y*  bigest  puter  platter  a  winscort  cubard  and  here  choys  of  too  more  platters  [&] 
y«  great  table  ;  and  to  annas  daughter  y«  draw  box  and  a  too  yer  old  hefer — i 
giue  to  Jeremiahs  daughter  y^  brass  pan  only  they  are  not  now  to  com  to  y«  pos- 
esion  of  it  till  after  my  death  [&c.] 

The   remainder  of  her  estate  she  gave  to  Jeremiali   and 
Joshua.     She  was  still  living  in  AVaterbury,  Jan.  23,  1711 . 
Children : 

1.  Samuel;  b.  Jan.  18,  1658-9,  at  Guilford  and  settled  in  Greenwich.  He  was 
a  justice  of  the  peace  and  a  prominent  man  of  that  town,  and  d.  April  28,  1746. 
He  is  said  to  have  had  twelve  children. 

2.  Ruth  ;  b.  in  New  Haven,  April  3,  1661  ;  m.  Jonathan  Atwater,  of  New  Ha- 
ven, "  merchant  tailor,"  June  1,  1681,  and  had  ten  children. 

3.  Caleb.  He  proposed  to  settle  in  Waterbury  with  his  father,  and  had  a  grant 
of  a  house  lot  and  other  lands,  provided  he  did  so  ;  but  he  finally  concluded  to 
remain  in  Greenwich. 

4.  Anna  ;  m.  1690,  Thomas  Stanley,  son  of  Capt.  John  of  Farmington. 

5.  Jeremiah.  He  was  a  freeholder  in  Greenwich  in  May,  1689,  and  came  to 
"Waterbury  with  his  father.  He  had  a  house  lot  on  Willow  street,  next  to  Benja- 
min Jones'  home  lot,  and  other  lands,  granted  him  on  the  usual  conditions.  Half 
of  the  school  lot  or  propriety,  it  appears,  was  also  given  to  him.  In  Aug.  1709,  he 
purchased  for  £20  Israel  Richason's  house  and  home  lot,  on  the  corner  of  East 
Main  and  Cherry  streets,  but  whether  he  ever  lived  in  the  house,  I  know  not.  He 
removed  into  the  north  palrt  of  the  town  a  little  before  the  Northbury  society  was 
organized. 

Jeremiah  Peck  was  collector  of  town  rates  in  1703  ;  constable  in  1713,  1717 
and  1723,  and  a  deputy  to  the  General  Court  in  May,  1720  and  1721.  He  was 
one  of  the  two  first  deacons  of  the  Northbury  church,  appointed  1739.  His  wife 
was  Rachel,  the  d.  of  Obadiah  Richards,  to  whom  he  was  m.  June  14,  1704.  He 
d.  1752,  having  had  nine  children, — Johanna,  Jeremiah,  Rachel,  Anna,  Mary, 
Phebe,  Ruth,  Esther,  Martha.  All  except  Esther  survived  their  father.  The 
mother  had  previously  died.     Dea.  Peck's  inventory  amounted  to  £3,702,  12s.  6d. 

6.  Joshua.     He  was  the  youngest  son.     Nothing  was  said  about  him  at  the 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUKY.  lYl 

time  his  father  settled  in  Waterbury,  when  his  brothers  were  provided  for  ;  for 
the  reason,  it  is  presumed,  that  he  was  then  a  minor.  "March  28,  1694-5,"  [a  mis- 
take probably  for  1695,  J  he,  for  the  first  time,  had  a  grant  from  the  proprietors  of 
four  acres,  for  "  a  home  lot  where  he  can  find  it  between  this  and  the  last  of  April 
next,  he  to  build,"  &c. 

Joshua  Peck  is  rarely  named  and  does  not  seem  to  have  been  of  "much  ac- 
count," as  the  world  goes.  He  may  have  been  sickly  or  weakly.  He  conveyed  to 
his  brother  Jeremiah,  March  6,  1*728-9,  all  his  "right,  title,  interest  or  demands 
in  lands  or  proprietj'  in  Waterbury  whether  divided  or  undivided,"  in  considera- 
tion of  which,  he,  the  said  Jeremiah,  or  his  heirs,  was,  in  the  words  of  the  rec- 
ord, "  to  take  care  of  me  and  find  and  provide  for  me  good  and  sufQcient  meat, 
drink,  apparel,  washing  and  lodging,  and  take  care  of  me  both  in  sickness  and  in 
health,  so  long  as  I  live  with  him."     He  died  Feb.  14,  1735-6,  unmarried. 

PORTER. 

Daniel  Porter,  1st,  was  early  in  tlie  Colony.  In  March, 
1644-5,  lie  was  fined,  by  the  "P'ticiiler  Court,"  forty  shillings 
for  an  offense  against  the  rights  of  property.  He  was  licensed 
to  jDractice  physic  and  chirurgery,  in  1654,  by  the  General 
Court.  In  1661-2,  it  was  ordered  that  his  yearly  salary  should 
be  paid  out  of  the  public  treasury,  while  his  fee-table  was  es- 
tablished by  law.  Though  not  an  original  proprietor,  he  set- 
tled early  in  Farmington,  and  was  required  to  attend  vipon  the 
sick  in  Hartford,  Windsor,  Wethersfield,  and  occasionally  in 
Middletown.  In  1668,  he  was  "  freed  from  watching,  wardeing 
and  tryneinge,"  and  in  the  next  year  had  a  special  grant  from 
the  Court  for  his  services.*  lie  was  more  particularly  celebrated 
as  a  "  bonesetter,"  and  in  1671  his  salary  was  increased  thus : 

For  the  incouragement  of  Daniel  Porter  in  atending  the  seruice  of  the  country 
in  setting  bones,  &c.,  the  Court  doe  hereby  augment  his  sallery  from  six  pounds  a 
yeare  to  twelue  pounds  p'  annum,  and  doe  aduise  him  to  instruct  some  meet  person 
in  his  arte. 

Daniel  Porter's  name  is  not  on  the  list  of  the  freemen  of 
Farmington  in  1669,  but  is  found  among  the  proprietors  of 
1672.  He  died  in  1690.  His  wife's  name  was  Mary.  Their 
children  were  :  1.  Daniel;  b.  Feb.  2,  1652-3.  2.  Mary  ;  b. 
Feb.  5,  1654-5,  and  m.  Eleazer  Knowles  of  "Woodbury.  3. 
Kehemiah  ;  b.  Oct.  24,  1656  ;  m.  Hannah  Lum  of  "Woodbury, 

*  This  was  a  grant  of  100  acres  which  the  grantee  took  up  near  the  northwest  corner  of  Wal- 
lingford.  It,  however,  proved  not  to  be  colony  land,  as  supposed,  and  the  Assembly  granted,  in 
17'2S,  on  petition,  to  the  grandsons  of  Daniel  Porter,  (Daniel  Porter,  son  of  Daniel  of  Waterbury, 
and  Hezekiah  Porter  of  Woodbury,  son  of  Richard  of  New  Haven,)  100  acres  west  of  Housatonic 
or  Stratford  River.    [Towns  and  Lands.] 


172  IIISTOKY    OF    WATEEBUEY. 

and  d.  1722.  4.  Eicliard  ;  b.  Marcli  21,  1658.  5.  Anne  ;  b. 
1660-61;  not  married.  6.  John;  b.  Nov.  14,  1662;  m.  Ee- 
becca  Woodford  and  Martba  Kortli,  and  d.  1710.  7.  Samuel ; 
b.  Oct.  24,  1665  ;  m.  Abigail  Humplireys  of  Simsbnry,  and  d. 
March  25,  1736.  He  was  a  doctor,  and  sncceeded  to  his 
father's  business  in  Farmington. 

DANIEL  PORTER,  (Jr.) 

He  signed  the  articles,  (or  his  father  did  for  him — "  Daniel 
Porter  for  son,")  in  1674.  He  had  an  old  town  plot  lot  and 
a  meadow  allotment  in  the  beginning  of  the  settlement,  and  a 
proportion  of  fence  in  all  the  divisions.  His  name  is  never 
mentioned  on  the  earliest  records,  except  as  grantee  or  propri- 
etor. IN^o  reference  w^hatever  is  made  to  his  occupation  till 
Feb.  22,  1696-7,  when  he  is  called,  in  a  deed,  "  bonesetter." 
After  this  he  is  termed,  in  the  record,  Doctor  Porter.  He 
may  not  have  taken  up  the  business  of  his  father  till  after  the 
death  of  the  latter.  His  knowledge  appears  to  have  been 
empyrical,  rather  than  scientific.  There  were  but  few  educa- 
ted surgeons  or  physicians  in  the  country,  at  that  day.  Cler- 
gymen not  infrequently  practiced  the  healing  art. 

Dr.  Porter  had  but  little  to  do  with  the  town  business.  He 
w^as  town  surveyor,  however,  in  1699  and  1719,  and  school 
committee  in  1706.  He  had  a  house  lot  on  the  main  street 
near  the  center  of  the  village,  where  the  Scovill  House  now 
stands,  extending  through  to  Grand  street,  containing  about 
two  acres.  Adjoining  lots  are  bounded  on  it,  in  1687,  but  it 
is  not  then  called  a  "  house  lot,"  acording  to  the  custom.  It 
does  not  seem  to  have  been  recorded  at  all.  Jan.  6,  1696,  the 
town  granted  him  a  piece  of  land,  &c.,  "  provided  he  build  a 
tenantable  hous  within  thre  yeirs."  This  language  by  no 
means  proves  that  he  had  not  already  built  a  house,  (or  bought 
one,)  as  the  articles  required  ;  nor  indeed  is  it  evidence  that  he 
did  not  own  one  at  the  time.  Soon  after  he  had  taken  a  wife, 
his  lot  is  called  a  house  lot.  It  was  bounded,  in  1687,  north 
and  south  on  highway,  w^est  on  Timothy  Standley's  house  lot, 
east  on  Abraham  Andruss,  Jr's  house  lot.  In  March,  1707-8, 
he  enlarged  it  by  purchasing  of  Abraham  Andruss,  son  of 
Abraham,  deed.,  the  place  next  his  on  the  east,  the  considera- 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY.  173 

tioii  being  £20  cash.  After  Porter's  death,  his  son  Thomas 
bought  of  the  other  heirs  the  whole  property,  four  and  a  half 
acres,  "  excepting  twenty  foot  square  on  the  east  side,  joining 
the  highway,  to  build  a  small  house  upon,"  which  his  brother 
James  reserved  for  himself. 

Daniel  Porter's  death  took  place  Jan.  18,  1726-7.  His 
M^hole  estate  was  appraised  at  about  £1,265;  his  house  and 
home  lot  at  £190  ;  his  propriety  right  at  £15 ;  five  cows  at  £20. 
His  medical  library  consisted  of  "  a  bone  set  book,  2s."  Much 
of  his  property  he  had  given  away  to  his  children  during  his 
life-time.     He  left  a  widow,  Deborah.     She  d.  May  11:,  1765. 

Children  : 

1.  Daniel;  b.  March  5,  1699  ;  mar.  Hannah,  d.  of  John  Hopkins,  and  d.  Nov. 
1-t,  1772.  He  was  a  bachelor  proprietor  and  "  bonesetter,"  and  succeeded  to  his 
father's  business  and  skill.  July  5,  1725,  his  father  conveyed  to  him,  his  eldest 
son,  "  that  he  may  have  conveniency  of  building  and  a  house  lot  in  the  town, 
seven  and  a  half  acres  at  the  east  end  of  the  town,  north  and  east  on  highway, 
south  on  Mill  River,  west  on  bounds  made  by  John  Scovill,  Sen.,  and  Cap. 
Ephraim  Warner,"  in  1770.  This  is  the  lot  which  hes  between  East  Main  street. 
Mill  street,  and  the  Mad  River,  on  the  northwest  corner  of  which  Porter  built  a 
house  and  lived. 

2.  James  ;  b.  April  20,  1700.  He  too  was  a  doctor,  settled  at  Hop  Swamp,  and 
d.  March  20,  1785. 

3.  Thomas;  b.  April  1,  1702.  He  lived  on  the  east  side  of  Bank  street,  near 
the  Baptist  church,  and  late  in  life  removed  to  Salem.  He  died  in  Jan.  1797- 
He  was  frequently  selectman,  and  became  a  captain. 

4.  Deborah  ;  b.  March  6,  1703-4 ;  m.  James  Baldwin. 

5.  Ebenezer ;  b.  Dec.  24,  1708  ;    m.  Mary,  d.  of  John  Hull  of  New  Haven. 

6.  Ann  ;  b.  April  28,  1712;  m.  Thomas  Judd  and  James  Nichols. 

RICHARD  rORTER. 

He  was  not  a  proprietor  of  AVaterbury  sufficiently  earlj^  to 
have  one  of  the  old  town  plot  lots,  or  an  allotment  of  either  of 
the  four  first  divisions  of  fence.  He  was  accepted  by  the 
grand  committee,  probably  in  1684,  having  one  of  the 
smallest  rights,  (£50.)  I  do  not  find  his  name  mentioned  till 
1686.  In  May,  1688,  he  had  libert}^  to  record  his  lands,  hav- 
ing then,  I  suppose,  complied  with  the  conditions  of  a  sub- 
scriber and  proprietor.  He  had  two  acres  "for a  house  lot," 
within  the  south  meadow  gate  on  the  corner  near  the  present 
corner  of  Bank  and  Meadow  street,  bounded,  Dec.  1691,  west, 
south  and  east  on  highway,  north  on  Jonathan  Scott.     After- 


174  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

wards,  March  18,  1694-5,  lie  bonglit  of  tlie  widow  of  Abraham 
Andriiss,  Jr.,  for  £26,  a  house  and  lot  of  three  acres  next  ad- 
joining him  on  the  north,  "  lying  at  y^  south  east  corner  of 
y®  town,"  east  and  west  on  highway,  north  on  Stephen  Upson 
and  south  on  said  Porter. 

Kichard  Porter  seems  to  have  been  a  quiet  man,  having  but 
little  to  do  with  public  business.  He  was,  however,  surveyor 
in  1703  and  1704,  town  collector  in  1706,  school  committee 
in  1709  and  selectman  in  1713.  In  1712,  he  was  chosen  "to 
dig  the  graves;"  and  a  hard  time  he  must  have  had,  for  the 
great  sickness  was  in  the  town.  Afterwards,  he  removed  from 
the  place,  for  what  reason,  it  does  not  appear.  He  staid,  how- 
ever, through  the  dark  days  of  the  settlement.  After  Dec. 
1716,  when  he  was  chosen  hay  ward,  his  name  does  not  appear  in 
the  Waterbury  records  as  an  inhabitant.  In  Nov.  1718,  he 
was  in  NewPIaven  in  the  part  called  West  Haven.  He  d,  in 
1739-40.  His  will,  dated  Kov.  13,  1738,  was  approved  Feb. 
1739-40,  his  son  Ilezekiah  being  executor.  In  it  he  speaks  of 
himself  as  "  being  weak  of  body  by  reason  of  age,"  alludes 
to  his  wife,  to  whom  he  gives  his  house,  homestead  and  mova- 
bles, and  to  the  heirs  of  Daniel  of  Simsbnry  and  Samuel  of 
Waterbury,  who  had  received  their  portions.  His  land  and 
rights  of  land  in  Waterbury  were  to  be  divided  equally  among 
his  other  children,  except  John  was  to  have  "  a  double  part  he 
not  being  able  to  shift  for  himself  so  well  as  the  others." 
Estate  in  ]^ew  Haven  £154;  in  Waterbury  £199.  Debts 
£28,  I8s. 

Eichard  Porter  is  called  Doctor  Porter  on  the  probate 
record  of  I*^ew  Haven,  but  never  in  Waterbury.  Probably 
he  took  up  the  business  of  "  doctoring  "  after  his  removal.  His 
first  wife,  named  Ruth,  d.  in  Waterbury,  Jan.  9,  1709-10. 

Children  : 

1.  Daniel;  b.  before  his  father  came  to  Waterbury.  He  was  admitted  a 
bachelor  proprietor  Jan.  5,  1707-8,  and  remained  in  Waterbury  several  years 
afterwards ;  but  he  finally  removed  without  having  complied  with  the  conditions 
of  the  grant  and  settled  in  Simsbury,  where  he  had  a  family.  ( A  son,  Joshua, 
settled  in  Waterbury.)    He  was  a  doctor  and  d.  before  his  father. 

2.  Joshua;  b.  Aug.  7,  1688,  in  Waterbury,  and  d.  Nov.  19,  1709. 

3.  Mary  ;  b.  Jan.  14,  1690-91,  and  was  living  as  Mary  Northrop,  at  the  time  of 
her  father's  death. 


HISTORY   or   WATEKBTTET.  175 

4.  Ruth  ;  b.  Oct.  1692,  and  was  living  as  Ruth  Cosset  at  her  father's  decease. 

5.  Samuel;  b.  March  30,  1695;  m.  Mary,  d.  of  John  Bronson,  May  9,  1722. 
He  was  a  bachelor  proprietor,  admitted  in  1715.  In  Dec.  1722,  his  father  deeded 
to  him  a  part  of  his  house  lot  in  Waterbury,  three  acres,  being  the  southeast  part 
of  the  old  homestead,  southward  and  eastward  on  highway,  northward  on  parson- 
age land,  westward  on  the  grantor's  land.     He  d.  1727-8. 

6.  Hezekiah;  b.  Jan.  29,  1696-7,  and  d.  Aug.  1702. 

7.  John;  b.  June  11,  1700;  was  living  with  Dea.  Clark  in  1730. 

8.  Timothy;  b.  Dec.  21,  1701  ;  m.  Mary,  d.  of  Jonathan  Baldwin,  of  Water- 
bury,  Dec.  18,  1735,  and  Hannah  Winter,  Aug.  27,  1767.  He  had  a  house  in  the 
southwest   quarter  in  1754.     In  1732,  he  lived  in  Stratford. 

9.  Hezekiah  ;  b.  July  27,  1704.  He  was  living  in  Woodbury  in  1728,  and  in 
Waterbury  when  his  father  died. 

10.  Joshua;  b.  Nov.  5,  1718,  his  birth  being  recorded  in  New  Haven. 

11.  Richard;  b.  Aug.  22,1722. 

12.  Lydia;  was  living  as  Lydia  Pardee  of  New  Haven,  at  her  father's  decease. 

ROBERT  PORTER. 

He  was  a  first  settler  but  not  an  original  proprietor  of  Far- 
mington.  It  is  not  known  what  relation,  if  any,  lie  was  to 
Daniel  and  Tliomas  Porter,  also  of  F.  He  joined  the  ehurcli 
Oct,  13,  1652,  was  one  of  the  freemen  of  1669,  and  of  the 
eighty-four  proprietors  of  1672.  He  first  subscribed  the 
articles  for  the  settlement  of  Mattatuclv,  as  late  as  May  26, 
1684.  His  name  is  on  the  list  of  proprietors  of  1688,  and  it 
stands  first  among  tlie  subscribers  to  Mr.  Peck's  settlement. 
He  had  a  house  and  house  lot  on  the  north  side  of  "West  Main 
street,  one  acre  and  a  half,  bounded,  Feb.  1687-8,  "northerly 
and  southerly  on  high-way,  easterly  on  Thomas  Hancox  his 
land  belonging  to  Ensign  Judd,  west  on  John  "Warner  his 
land."  This  property  his  son  Thomas  sold,  Jan.  1692-3,  to 
Abraham  Andruss,  Jr. 

Eobert  Porter  m.  1611,  Mary,  d.  of  Thomas  Scott  of  Hartford. 

Children  : 

1.  Mary;  b.  Feb.  24,  1646,  and  m.  Benjamin  Andruss. 

2.  John;  b.  Nov.  12,  1648,  and  d.  before  1686. 

3.  Thomas;  b.  Oct.  29,  1650;  m.  May,  1678,  Abagail  Cowles,  and  d.  1719.  He 
was  executor  of  his  father's  will,  and  the  only  surviving  son  and  principal  heir. 
He  was  a  tailor  by  trade,  lived  in  Farmington,  and  d.  in  1719. 

4.  Robert;  b.  Nov.  12,  1652,  and  d.  1689. 

5.  Elizabeth;  b.  Jan.  11,  1653-4,  and  m.  Thomas  Andrews  of  Milford. 

6.  Joanna;  baptized  Jan.  6,  1655-6. 

7.  Sarah;  b.  Dec  20,  1657,  and  m.  Abraham  Andruss  (cooper)  of  Waterbury, 
and  James  Benedict  of  Danbury. 


176  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBURY. 

8.  Benjamin;  b.  March  18,  1659-60,  and  d.  1689,  leaving  his  widow  pregnant. 
She  m.  June,  1689,  Edmund  Scott,  Jr.* 

9.  Hannah,  or  Anne ;  b.  April,  1664,  and  m.  John  Browne. 

10.  Hepzibah;  b.  March  4,  1666. 

Robert  Porter  married  (after  1675)  for  his  second  wife, 
Hannah,  the  widow  of  Stephen  Freeman  of  Newark,  (East 
Jersey,)  and  the  mother  of  the  wife  of  Thomas  Jndd,  smith. 
He  died  in  ]  689.  The  inYentory  of  his  estate  was  taken  Sept. 
18,  1689,t  and  amounted  to  £179,  14s.  in  Waterbnry,  and 
£79,  6s.  in  Farming-ton.  The  children  named  are  Thomas, 
Mary,  Elizabeth,  Sarah,  Hannah. 

OBADIAH  RICHARDS. 

Thomas  Eichards,  the  father  of  Obadiah  of  Waterbnry,  was 
early  in  Hartford.  He  was  one  of  those  who,  in  1639,  had  the 
privilege  of  getting  wood  and  keeping  cows  on  the  common. 
He  soon  died,  however,  and  his  lands  went  into  the  possession 
of  his  widow,  who  brought  up  the  children.  At  her  death,  in 
1671,  the  estate  went  to  the  children, — John,  (born  in  1631, 
and  married  Lydia  Stocking,)  Mary  Peck,  (of  Milford,)  Thom- 
as, (married  Mary,  daughter  of  Dea.  Parsons  of  Springfield, 
1691,)  and  Obadiah.     A  son,  Samuel,  died  before  his  mother. 

Obadiali  Richards  was  an  early  but  not  a  first  settler  of 
Farmington.  He  was  "  presented  for  freeman"  to  the  Court, 
May,  1669  ;  was  one  of  the  proprietors  of  1672  ;  took  an  ear-  ■ 
ly  interest  in  the  Mattatuck  enterprise  ;  was  one  of  the  origi- 
nal thirty,  &c.  There  is  evidence  that  he  joined  the  settle- 
ment early,  in  the  fact  that  he  had  an  old  town  plot  lot  and  a 


*  "A  paper  whith  EdmanScote  cased  to  be  entred  [on  record]— the  contents  now  follow — 
f;  Know  all  men  whom  itt  may  concerne  that  I  Robert  Porter:  of  watterbury  haue  formerly 
giuen  to  my  sonn :  benjamin:  thre  parsells  of  land  folowing  which  being  now  desesed 
[deceased]  my  desire  is  that  if  itt  pleas  god  to  giue  him  an  heire:  that  the  lands  herafter:  men- 
tioned: may  fall  to  it  but  as  1  desire  the  lord  may  requite  the  wife  of  my  sonn  desesed:  so 
these  are  to  declare  that  i  doo  sequester:  the  right  to  the:  use  of  the  lands  following  to  the  wife 
of  my  son  aboue  said  desed  during  her  naturall  life:  vis  [viz:] — [here  are  enumerated  seven 
piecev  of  land,  twenty  four  acres  in  all] — all  which  parsells  of  land  as  they  Ij-  my  dafter 
[daughter]  aboue  said  shall  and  may  quiatly  pesably  ocupy  poses  and  injoy  [&c.,]  my  hand 
and  seale  tliis  19  feb  16S9 

Robert  porter 

t  There  are  discrepancies  as  to  dates  which  I  am  unable  now  to  reconcile.  His  gift  deed  re- 
lating to  his  son  Benjamin's  widow  bears  date  Feb.  19,  1G59,  which,  in  new  style,  should  read 
Feb.  19,  1690 ;  and  yet,  the  said  widov.-  is  stated  on  the  record  to  have  married  Edmund  Scott 
"sometime  in  June  16S9." 


^ CRAVED  Sy SAMUEL  Sn 


J^f^rn^j    /^^^crtxy^?^ 


yiV/v./>/«6-^/.'X 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURT.  lY7 

proportion  of  fence  in  all  tlie  divisions.  But  lie  had  a  tardy, 
slip-sliod  way  of  doing  things  ;  and  when  the  crisis  came,  it 
was  found  that  he  had  not  rendered  a  full  compliance  with  the 
conditions  of  the  articles,  and  his  allotments  were  condemned 
in  16S2-3.  He  mended  his  ways,  however,  and  his  rights 
were  restored.  As  a  grantee,  I  do  not  find  his  name  earlier 
than  1685. 

Obadiah  Eichards  appears  to  have  been  one  of  the  rank  and 
file  of  the  young  town — an  excellent  man,  it  is  safe  to  say. 
He  had  a  house  and  home  lot  on  the  north  side  of  West  Main 
street,  next  west  of  Philip  Judd's.  The  lot  ("  his  by  purchase 
as  a  planter  ")  contained  three  acres,  and  was  the  first  (going 
from  east  to  west)  which  ran  through  to  the  back  street.  It 
was  bounded,  Jan.  1703-4,  west  on  Thomas  Judd's  house  lot, 
east  on  a  house  lot  belonging  to  the  heirs  of  Philip  Judd, 
deceased. 

Both  Richards  and  his  wife  Hannah  were  members  of  Mr. 
Hooker's  church  of  Farmington.  After  lingering  for  some 
time  in  poor  health,  he  died  Nov.  11,  1702.  His  inventory 
amounted  to  £138.  (His  widow  died  about  May,  1725.)  A 
year  before  his  decease,  he  disposed  of  much  of  his  estate  by 
the  following  writing,  which  is  recorded  in  Yol.  I,  Land 
Records,  p.  102  : 

This  wrighting  made  y^  seuenteenth  of  may  one  thousan  seuen  himdrcd 
and  one  witnesseth  y*  I  obadiah  Richards  sen"^  [&c.]  for  good  and  lawfull  resins 
do  giue,  [&c.]  unto  my  well  beloued  children  as  followeth  first  hauing  a  pece  of 
upland  situated  in  s"*  waterbury  lying  norwest  from  woster  swamp  by  estimation 
fifteen  acers  butting  on  euery  sd  on  com~on  lands  and  I  being  by  sickness  layd 
by  not  al^le  to  labour  and  sd  lands  of  no  benefit  without  great  chorg  [charge]  be- 
stoed  on  it  and  for  y«  incuragment  of  my  too  soous  John  and  Obediah  to  build  on 
and  breck  up  sd  lands  y'  I  and  my  wife  haue  som  Releife  by  it  do  by  this  giue  y^ 
one  half  of  sd  land,  to  my  soon  John  and  y^  other  half  to  obadiah  &  to  obadiah 
my  part  of  sd  buildings  y'  sd  John  and  obadiah  haue  begun  on  these  conditions  not 
to  com  to  full  posession  of  it  till  after  my  death  and  after  y'  to  alow  my  wife 
four  bushills  of  grain  by  y*  yeir  such  as  y«  land  produces  if  they  improue  it  and 
my  soons  John  and  obadiah  to  haue  sd  lands  and  buildings  after  my  deceas  as  their 
own  free  estate  [&c.]  2ly  to  my  soons  Thomas  and  ben~in  Richards  my  three 
acer  lot  y'  lyes  northward  from  y«  town  within  y®  com~"on  fenc  on  y*  same  con- 
ditions yt  John  and  obadiah  has  theirs  [&c.]  furder  I  sd  obadiah  Richards  sen'  to 
my  eldest  soon  John  my  a  lot  ment  att  bucks  meadow  [&c.]  for  euer  to  be  acount- 
ed  to  him  and  his  acknowledgment  as  my  eldest  soon  and  after  in  other  distributions 
to  be  but  equaU  with  y«  rest  of  my  children — y«  obligation  of  John  and  obadiah 

12 


178  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 

to  my  wife  if  i  dy  before  her  is  during  her  widowhood  and  thomas  and  benjamin 
is  free  from  paying  any  obligation  to  my  wife  for  y^  lot  i  luuie  here  giuen  y""  as 
witness  my  hand  and  sealle 

01;tadiah  Richards  Sen'' 

Children  : 

1.  John;  b.  1667. 

2.  Mary;  b.  Jan.,  1669,  m.  George  Scott. 

3.  Hannah;  b.  Nov.  1671,  m.  John  ScoviU,  (2d.) 

4.  Esther;  b.  June,  1673,  m.  Ephraim  "Warner. 

5.  Ehzabeth;  b.  July,  1675,  m.  John  Eichards,  son  of  Thomas. 

6.  Sarah  ;  b.  April,  1677,  m.  David  Scott. 

7.  Obadiah  ;  b.  Oct.  1,  1679.  He  was  bap.  in  Farmington,  March  14,  1679-80,  at 
the  same  time  with  his  sisters,  Mary,  Hannah,  Esther,  Elizabeth,  Sarah.  He  was  a 
£40  proprietor,  admitted,  Dec.  1700  ;  one  of  the  committee  that  settled  the  bounds 
with  Derby  in  April,  1703,  and  a  fence  viewer  the  same  year.  Soon  after,  when  his 
rights  had  been  made  sure,  and  thick  gloom  was  settling  over  the  plantei's  of  Wa- 
terbury,  he  made  his  escape,  and  was  next  heard  of  in  Lyme.  There  he  died 
about  1707.  In  1720,  his  administrators,  Jabez  and  Sarah  Watrous,  sold  out  his 
lands,  rights,  &c.,  in  Waterbury,  to  Joseph  Lathrop  of  Norwich  for  £30. 

8.  Rachel;  b.  May  6,  1683,  m.  Jeremiah  Peck,  (2d.) 

9.  Thomas;  b.  Aug.  9,  1685.  He  was  made  a  bachelor  proprietor  in  1707-8  ; 
m.  Hannah,  d.  of  Stephen  Upson,  (1st,)  and  d.  in  1726.     Estate,  £288. 

10.  Benjamin ;  b.  April  5,  1691.  He  was  accepted  as  a  bachelor  proprietor  as 
soon  as  he  was  of  age,  and  d.  June  2, 1714,  without  a  family.  His  brother  John 
was  administrator,  his  estate  going  to  his  brothers  and  sisters. 

JOHN  RICHARDS. 

He  was  the  eldest  son  of  Obadiah,  hut  appears  not  to 
have  been  an  original  proprietor.  In  1700-1,  Jan.  15,  he 
purchased  (of  the  executor)  Eohert  Porter's  £100  right,  and 
the  purchase  was  recorded  in  a  formal  way.  And  yet,  he  is 
always  named  on  the  division-lists  as  an  £80  proprietor.  Pie 
is  first  spoken  of  "  Jan.  21,  1689,"  when  he  had  a  grant  of  land 
of  four  acres,  on  the  usual  conditions  of  building  and  "  cohab- 
iting four  years."  In  December,  1690,  he  received  twelve 
acres,  "  abought  three  quarters  of  a  mile  up  y^  spruce  brook 
aboue  moun  taylor  on  ye  east  sd  y^  great  riuer  on  y^  same 
conditions,"  &c.  In  1692,  Aug.  17,  he  got  married,  and  soon 
after  had  a  house  on  the  west  side  of  the  "mill  path."  May 
7,  1694:,  the  town  granted  him  "  liberty  to  let  his  house  stand 
where  now  it  is  and  to  haue  the  land  and  to  run  to  the  rear  of 
John  Hopkins  home  lot  he  setting  the  fence  on  the  north  side 
the  path  that  now  leads  to  the  corn  mill  and  to  relinquish  that 


niSTOKT   OF   WATERBUET.  179 

part  of  liis  lot  that  runs  the  north  side  the  path.''*  Tlie 
lot  was  afterwards  ("  March  28,  1694-5  ")  granted  in  a  more 
formal  manner,  butted  south  on  Stephen  Upson,  west  on  John 
Hopkins  and  a  great  lot  and  on  Thomas  Warner,  and  north 
on  the  path  leading  to  the  corn  mill.  This  land,  called  three 
acres,  witii  the  house,  Richards  sokl  in  March,  1698-9,  to 
Thomas  "Warner,  taking  in  exchange  Warner's  house  and  lot 
on  Bank  street,  near  the  present  Baptist  Church.  Here  he 
afterwards  resided  ;  but  in  1727,  Sept.  28,  he  sold  out  for  £100, 
conveying  the  property  (two  and  three  quarter  acres  of  land) 
to  Jonathan  Prindle. 

John  Richards  seems  to  have  maintained  a  respectable  stand- 
ing, lie  was  several  times  collector  of  minister's  rates,  school 
committee,  grand  juror,  &c.  In  1700, 1701, 1712,  1713,  1720, 
he  was  selectman,  and  in  May,  1723,  a  deputy  to  the  General 
Court.  He  died  early  in  1735.— Estate  £1,605, 10s.  lOd.  His 
will  was  dated  June  7,  1733,  and  proved  April  22d,  1735. 
Several  children  are  named. 

His  wife  was  Mary,  a  daughter  of  John  Welton,  to  whom 
he  was  married  Aug.  17,  1692. 

THOMAS   RICHASOX. 

He  was  an  early  but  not  a  first  settler  of  Farmington,  and 
was  one  of  the  eighty-four  proprietors  of  1672.  In  167-4,  he 
subscribed  the  articles  for  settling  Mattatuck,  and  was  suffi- 
ciently early  in  his  movements,  as  a  planter,  to  secure  an 
old  town  j)lot  lot,  and  a  portion  of  fence  in  each  of  the  four 
divisions.  Though  a  very  good  man,  apparently,  ( I  find  him 
called  Goodraanf  Richason  at  an  early  date,)  he  had  not  a 
"steady  way,"  or  was  slow  in  meeting  his  engagements,  and 
his  rights  were  declared  forfeited  in  1682-3.  But  like  others 
in  a  similar  predicament,  he  bestired  himself  and  regained 
possession.  He  had  but  a  £50  right,  and  complained  to  the 
committee,  in  Feb.  1680-81,  that  he  was  in  want  of  land  to 


*  From  this  vote,  it  would  seem  that  the  land,  at  the  time  the  house  was  erected,  was  common 
land,  and  Khat  afterwards  a  road  was  run  through  it  to  the  mill,  leaving  a  small  portion  on 
"  the  north  [or  northeasterly]  side." 

t  This  terra  was  formerly  applied  to  persons  of  humble  but  respectable  mediocrity  as  to 
character  and  position. 


ISO 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBURY. 


improve.  He  had  liberal  grants  at  various  times,  and  was  a 
subscriber  to  Mr.  Peck's  settlement. 

Thomas  Kichason  owned  a  lot,  in  168T,  on  the  south  side  of 
the  Green,  west  of  Mr.  Kendrick's ;  but  whether  he  had  a 
house  there  and  lived  in  it,  I  am  unable  to  say.  In  March, 
1792-3,  he  bought  of  Thomas  Newel  for  £60  three  and  a  half 
acres  on  West  Main  street,  near  where  Samuel  J.  Holmes  now 
lives,  where  he  afterwards  appears  to  have  resided.  The  lot 
had  on  it  two  houses,  (one  of  which  had  been  Thomas  Han- 
cock's,) and  was  bounded  in  1708,  "  west  on  the  Porters, "  east 
on  John  Bronson,  north  and  south  on  highways. 

Thomas  Richason  d.  ITov.  14,  1712,  and  his  wife,  Mary,  one 
week  afterwards,  ]^ov.  21,  both  victims  of  the  great  sickness. 
Three  of  their  sons,  John,  Israel  and  Nathaniel,  also  d.  of  the 
pestilence  before  the  close  of  the  year. 

Children  : 

1.  Mary  ;  b.  Dec.  25,  1667. 

2.  Sarah;  b.  March  25,  1669. 

3.  John;  b.  April  15,  1672,  d.  Oct.  17,  1712.  He  m.  Ruth,  a  daughter 
of  John  Wheeler,  and  Ehzabeth,  a  daughter  of  Nathaniel  Arnold,  Senr.  He  was 
admitted  to  bachelor  privileges.  May  15,  1699,  but  he  had  previously  had  liberal 
grants  of  land.  The  first  of  these  was  March  28,  1694—5  —  "  four  acres  for  a  house 
lot  on  the  north  side  the  highway  that  leads  to  Farniington,  the  east  side  the  high- 
way that  ranges  by  Serg.  Stanley's  lot  into  the  woods  north,  he  fulfilling  the  tarms 
of  original  articles."  This  lot  was  on  the  east  corner  of  East  Main  and  Cherry 
streets,  and  on  it  Richarson,  himself  a  carpenter,  built  a  house.  It  was  recorded 
to  him  Jan.  1703-4,  and  was  described  as  lying  northeast  from  the  town,  south 
and  west  on  highway,  and  north  and  east  on  common  land.  This  place  he  deeded 
at  about  the  last  named  date  to  his  brother  Israel,  receiving  in  exchange  a  house 
and  lot  of  one  acre  next  his  father  on  the  west  side. 

4.  Thomas.  He  had  a  grant  of  land  March,  1695  ;  was  accepted  as  a  bach,  pro- 
prietor, March  26,  1699  ;  remained  in  AVaterbury  long  enough  to  secure  his  right, 
and  then  removed  to  Wallingford.  He  was  there  in  July,  1705.  After  his  father's 
death,  he  returned  to  Waterbury,  and  was  appointed  fence  viewer  in  1713, 
"grave  digger"  in  1714,  1715  and  1716,  and  hayward  in  1714,  1717  and  1718. 
In  1719,  (March  30,)  he  sold  his  house  and  lot  of  six  acres  on  the  north  side  of 
West  Main  street,  ( north  and  south  on  highway,  east  on  Richards'  land,  and  west 
on  Ebenezer  Richason's  house  lot, )  to  Thomas  Richards'  and  returned  to  Walling- 
ford, where  he  was  living  in  1722,  a  farmer. 

5.  Israel.  He  had  a  grant  of  land  as  early  as  March  28,  1694,  four  acres  for  a 
house  lot,  on  the  north  side  the  town,  "if  it  be  there  to  be  had,  he  fulfilling  the 
tarms  of  the  original  articles."  He  became  a  bach,  proprietor  March  26,  1699. 
Before  he  had  secured  his  right,  he  appears  to  have  left  the  plantation.  Dec.  21, 
1702,  the  town  granted  him  "  liberty  of  two  years  before  taking  the  forfeiture  of 


HISTORY   OF    WATEEBURY.  181 

his  land  and  that  if  he  come  again  in  two  years  to  live  in  the  town  to  have  his 
land,  but  if  he  do  not  then  to  lose  his  land  that  is  now  forfeited."  lie  returned, 
and  was  grave  digger  in  1707,  and  surveyor  in  1708  and  1709.  His  name  he 
signed  by  a  mark  in  1709.  He  lived  at  first  on  a  lot  of  one  acre  next  his  father, 
which  the  latter  gave  him  March,  1699-1700,  bounded  March,  1703-4,  east  on 
Thomas  Richason's  house  lot,  west  on  Jonathan  Scott's  house  lot,  north  and  south 
on  highway.  This  he  exchanged,  in  1703,  for  his  brother  John's  place.  He  d.  of 
the  great  sickness,  Dec.  18,  1712,  a  few  weeks  before  his  wife  and  his  oldest  child 
Mary. 

6.  Rebecca  ;  b.  April  27,  1G79,  and  ra.  John  Warner,  son  of  John.  This  is  the 
first  recorded  birth  in  Waterbury. 

7.  Ruth ;  b.  May  lu,  1681,  became  the  second  wife  of  Henry  Castle  of  Wood- 
bury. ( Cothren.  ) 

8.  Johanna ;  b.  Sep.  1,  1G83,  m.  Isaac  Castle  of  Woodbury  and  Daniel  Warner, 

9.  Nathaniel ;  b.  May  28,  1686.  He  was  accepted  as  a  bachelor,  Jan  7,  1706-7  . 
March  13,  1710-11,  the  proprietors  gave  him  "four  scor  acurs  of  land  on  the 
north  sid  the  road  to  Woodbury  up  the  grat  brok  est  from  breck  nek  hill,  one 
this  condition  that  he  tak  it  as  his  hole  proprity  as  a  bachclders  acomydation  and 
coninhabit  ten  years  in  the  town  in  a  seteled  way  and  bild  a  tenitabel  hous 
acording  to  originell  artycels  in  five  yers  and  coinhabit  5  yers  after  bilding  his 
hous."  Lieut.  Stanley,  Edmund  Scott  and  Jeremiah  Peck  protested  against  this  act 
of  the  proprietors. 

Nathaniel  Richarson,  d.  Nov.  3,  1712,  his  death  securing  his  lands  and  rights 
which  went  to  his  brothers  and  sisters. 

10.  Ebenezer;  b.  Feb.  4,  1689-90.  He  was  made  a  bach,  proprietor  March  5 
1711-12,  and  m.  Margaret,  daughter  of  Thomas  Warner.  He  was  one  of  the 
earliest  settlers  at  Wooster  Swamp,  living  near  "  Wooster  Brook."  He  d. 
June  30,  1772. 

SCOTT. 

Thomas  Scott  of  Hartford,  an  original  proprietor,  but  not  a 
settler,  of  Farinington,  had  a  son  Edmund  and  two  daughters, 
Maiy,  who  m.  Robert  Porter,  and  Sarah,  who  m.  John  Stanley 
of  Farming-ton. 

EDMUND  SCOTT,  Sen. 

He  settled  in  Farmington,  with  children,  at  an  early  date, 
and  m.  the  widow  of  Thomas  Upson.  His  two  youngest 
children,  Robert  and  Joseph,  were  by  her.  He  was  one  of  the 
freemen  of  Farmington  of  1669  and  one  of  the  proprietors  of 
1672.  A  subscriber  of  1674,  he  was  among  the  earliest  that 
came  to  Mattatuck.  His  regular  allotments  of  fence,  &c.,  in- 
dicate that  with  him  there  was  no  vascillation  of  purpose,  and 
that  he   discharged,   seasonably,   all  his   obligations.     He  is 


182  HISTORY   OF  WATERBUEY. 

mentioned  as  grantee  as  late  as  Jan.  21,  1689-90,  and  d.  soon 
after,  before  June  2,  1690.  At  the  last  date,  his  will  was 
proved,  but  bis  inventory,  showing  a  small  estate  of  $17,  lis. 
6d,,  was  not  presented  to  Court  till  April,  1691.  His  nine 
children  are  named  on  the  probate  record,  several  of  whom 
remained  in  Waterbury. 

Edmund  Scott's  house  stood  where  Green  Kendrick  now 
lives.  His  lot  contained  two  acres,  and  was  bounded,  Feb.  10, 
168T-8,  north  on  highway,  south  on  common,  east  on  John 
Carrington's  land,  west  on  Thomas  Richason's  land.  His 
children  were  as  follows,  (not  arranged  probably  in  the  exact 
order  of  age  : ) 

1.  Edmund  ;  in.  Sarah,  widow  of  Benjamin  Porter,  June,  1(589. 

2.  Samuel;  b.  1660,  m.  Feb.  1686-7,  Mary  Orviee.     (W.  S.  Porter.) 

3.  Elizabetli ;  m. Davis. 

4.  Hannah ;  m.  John  Bronson,  son  of  Richard  of  Farmington,  Oct.  1664? 
6.  Jonathan;  m.  Hannah,  d.  of  John  Hawks  of  Deerfield,  Nov.  1694. 

6.  George  ;  m.  Aug.  1691,  Mary,  d.  of  Obadiah  Richards,  and  d.  Sep.  26,  1724, 
leaving  an  estate  to  be  distributed  of  £605,  12s.  He  was  a  bach,  proprietor,  being 
admitted,  it  appears,  Jan.  5,  1707-8,  after  he  had  been  many  years  a  married 
man.  He  had  a  grant  of  a  house  lot  of  four  acres,  as  early  as  Dec.  1687, 
described  as  "  on  the  highway  that  runs  over  the  Little  Brook  [North  Main  street] 
at  the  northeast  corner  of  the  town  to  butt  easterly  on  the  brow  of  the  hill, 
[near  Andrew  Bryan's  house,]  and  so  to  run  westerly  over  the  brook  and  to  butt 
northerly  on  a  highway,  [Grove  street,]  provided  he  build  a  house  and  live  four 
years  in  the  town."  On  this  lot  Scott  built  a  house,  and  in  Nov.  1702,  it  was 
recorded  as  butting  west  on  a  highway.  He  sold  the  place,  Aug.  6,  1703,  to 
Benjamin  Warner,  and  in  March,  1707-8,  owned  a  house  and  lot  of  eight  acres 
and  a  half  on  the  north  side  of  Grove  street,  near  C.  C.  Adams'  residence. 

George  Scott  was  townsman  for  four  years  in  1698  and  afterwards,  surveyor  in 
1701,  1704  and  1717,  and  school  committee  in  1710  and  1711.  He  signed  his 
name  in  1702-3  by  proxy.  Obadiah  Scott,  his  eldest  son,  had  a  bachelor  lot,  being 
accepted  Dec.  13,  1713.  He  d.  in  1735.  George  Scott,  the  second  son,  was  also  a 
bachelor,  admitted  in  1715.  He  d.  without  a  family,  in  1725,  and  his  estate  was 
distributed  to  his  brothers  and  sisters.  The  third  son,  William  Scott,  had  a  half 
bachelor  lot,  granted  in  1722,  he  and  John  Warner,  son  of  Ephraim,  dividing 
between  them  the  "  fourth  propriety  lot." 

7.  David  ;  was  accepted  as  a  bachelor  proprietor  at  thesame  time  as  his  brother 
George.  He  had  several  grants  of  land,  beginning  as  early  as  March  28,  1694, 
which  were,  of  course,  a  part  of  his  divisions  on  his  £40  right.  He  was  surveyor 
school  committee,  and  grand  juror,  at  different  times;  and  in  1710,  townsman. 
He  lived  on  the  homestead  of  his  father,  and  in  1710,  enlarged  his  lot  by  purchase 
of  John  Carrington's  heirs.  After  his  death,  his  heirs,  "March  8,  1734," 
sold  the  property  for  £100,  to  James  Blakeslee,  described  as  three  acres  with  a 
house,  near  the  meeting  house,  north  and  south  on  highway,  east  on  Dea.  Clark, 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBIJRT.  183 

west  on  Edmund  Scott.  He  was  a  "husbandman."  He  m.  June  10,  1698,  Sarah, 
daughter  of  Obadiah  Richards,  and  d.  in  1727,  his  will  being  proved  Dec.  5,  of 
that  year. 

8.  Robert ;  was  admitted  as  a  £40  proprietor  May  lo,  1699.  Land  was  granted 
him  by  the  proprietors  in  Jan.  1692-3  and  afterwards.  He  owned  the  house  lot 
which  had  belonged  to  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  which  he  bought  in  1701.  This  place 
he  conveyed  Oct.  1708,  in  consideration  of  a  mare,  a  colt  and  a  cow  and  £5,  12s.,  to 
his  brother  Edmund.  After  he  had  secured  his  bachelor  right,  he  removed  from 
the  town,  and  was  in  Hartford  in  1708,  1716  and  1725,  a  bachelor,  apparently. 
His  £40  right  he  sold  to  his  brother  Jonathan. 

9.  Joseph  ;  he  lived  in  Farmington.  I  know  nothing  of  him,  except  what  may  be 
gathered  from  the  following  extract  from  the  Farmington  record.  It  bears  date 
Dec.  19,  1692,  and  illustrates  Puritan  manners  and  government.  I  suppose  he 
was  a  literal  bachelor. 

"The  towne  by  vote  gaue  to  Joseph  Scott  a  Libertie  to  dwell  a  Lone  prouided 
he  do  faithfully  improue  his  time  and  be  haue  him  self  peasablely  and  honestly 
towards  his  neithbours  and  their  Creatui-es  and  constantly  attend  the  publique 
worship  of  god,  and  that  he  do  give  an  account  how  he  spends  his  time  unto  the 
townesmen  when  it  shall  be  demanded."     [Town  Book,  Vol.  I,  p.  49.] 

EDMUND  SCOTT,  Jr. 

He  was  a  son  of  the  preceding,  and  was  accepted  bj  the 
committee,  in  the  place  of  William  Higason.  He  probably 
came  to  Mattatuck  with  his  father  and  was  made  a  proprietor 
when  he  became  of  age.  He  had  a  proj)ortion  of  fence  in  the 
second  division,  which  would  indicate  that  he  had  become  a 
proprietor  in  1678-9,  and  had  a  meadow  allotment  at  that 
time.  His  father  gave  him,  in  Feb.  1682-3,  the  house  which 
he  had  bnilt,  or  assisted  to  bnild,  on  the  lot  which  the  com- 
mittee had  bestowed  on  him,  (the  son.)  It  stood  on  the  south 
side  of  "West  Main  street,  near  where  John  C.  Booth  lives.  Tlie 
lot  contained  two  acres  and  was  bounded,  in  June,  1691,  north 
and  south  on  highway,  east  on  Mr.  Peck's  land,  and  west  on 
Thomas  Judd's  land.  He  (Edmund,  Jr.)  conveyed  it  and  the 
house,  with  the  land  which  he  had  added  to  it,  eight  acres  in 
the  whole,  in  1Y32,  to  his  son  Jonathan,  the  tract  buttiug  east 
on  the  heirs  of  David  Scott,  west  on  John  "Welton's  house  lot. 

Edmund  Scott,  Jr.,  was  townsman  in  1701  and  1702,  sur- 
veyor in  1710  and  1716,  and  grave  digger  in  1708,  1717,  1718, 
and  1720.  He  had  a  £70  right  in  the  undivided  lands.  He 
d.  at  an  advanced  age,  July  20,  1746,  having  outlived  all  the 
other  settlers  who  became  proprietors  before  1780. — Estate 
£143.     His  wife  d.  Jan.  17,  1748-9. 


184  HISTORY    OF   -WATERBrKY. 

Children : 

1.  A  son  ;  b.  Oct.,  1690,  amd  d.  Feb.  2d,  1690-1. 

2.  Sarah;  b.  Jan.  29,  1691-2,  m.  Samuel  Warner,  son  of  Thomas. 

3.  Samuel;  b.  Sept.  1694;  became  a  bach.  prop,  in  1715;  resided  at  Judd's 
Meadow  and  d.  April  30,  1768. — Estate  £294.  His  widow  (Mary,  daughter  of  John 
Eichards)  d.  Sept.  5,  1776. 

4.  Elizabeth  ;  b.  March  1,  1696-7  ;  m.  Samuel  Warner,  sou  of  Dauiel. 

5.  Hannah;  b.  June,  1700,  m.  in  1744,  Ebenezer  Elwell. 

6.  Edmund;  b.  May  10,  1703,  m.  Martha,  d.  of  John  Andruss,  Aug.  12,  1730, 
and  d.  March  23,  1733.— Estate  £229.     He  lived  at  Judd's  Meadow. 

7.  John;  b.  Sept.  21,  1707  ;  m.  Eunice,  d.  of  Thomas  Griffin  of  Simsbury,  and 
d.  March  14,  1756.  (His  widow  was  living  in  1766.)  He  lived  in  the  southwest 
quarter,  at  Judd's  Meadow,  near  "  Meshadock." 

8.  Jonathan;  b.  Aug.  4,  1711,  and  d.  1741,  giving  his  property  to  his  wife. 

SAMUEL  SCOTT. 

He  was  admitted  a  proprietor,  by  act  of  the  town,  Dec.  30, 
1684,  receiving  half  an  allotment  of  £100.  He  received,  at 
the  same  time,  a  lionse  lot  on  the  east  side  of  Bank  street,  all 
on  condition  that  he  should  build  a  house  according  to  the 
articles,  and  live  in  the  town  four  years  after  building.  These 
things  he  did.  He  was  not  in  the  town  soon  enough  to  have 
an  early  division  of  fence,  or  an  old  town  plot  eight  acre  lot ; 
but  he  was  among  those  who  participated  in  the  land-division 
of  1688,  after  which  time,  his  name  disappears  from  the  lists 
of  proprietors.  He  did  not  remain  long  in  the  town  after  his 
propriety  right  had  been  secured.  He  probably  left  in  1689, 
or  in  1689-90.  He  was  not  a  subscriber  to  Mr.  Peck's  £60 
settlement.  April  28,  1691,  he  was  "  of  Farmington,"  and  at 
that  date,  sold  and  conveyed  to  his  brother  Jonathan  all  his 
lands,  divided  and  undivided,  in  "Waterbury,  including  his 
house  and  house  lot  of  two  acres,  the  latter  bounded  north  on 
Stephen  Upson's  land,  south  on  Kichard  Porter,  west  on  high- 
way, east  on  common.  He  died  in  Farmington  June  SO,  1T45, 
aged  85,  and  his  wife  died  ISTov.  28,  1748,  aged  85. 

JONATHAN  SCOTT. 

He  was  a  son  of  Edmund,  Sen.,  and  is  first  mentioned  on 
the  records  in  Jan.  1689-90,  when  he  received  a  grant  of  land 
on  the  west  side  of  "  Union  Square,"  he  to  build  a  house  and 
"  inhabit  "  four  years.  It  does  not  appear  that  he  built  upon 
this  land.  In  Dec.  1690,  he  had  ten  acres  granted  him  at 
Wooster  Swamp,     His  name  is  not  among  the  subscribers  of 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY.  185 

tlie  agreement  with  Mr.  Peck,  he  then  probably  being  barely 
twentj-one  years  of  age.  He  became  a  proprietor  by  pur- 
chase of  his  brother  Samuel,  April  28,  1691. 

Jonathan  Scott  had  but  little  to  do  with  the  public  business. 
He  was  fence  viewer  in  1702,  1709  and  again  in  1717 — noth- 
ing inore.  His  name  is  rarely  found  on  the  records,  and  it  is 
difficult  to  find  his  "  whereabouts  "  from  recorded  evidence,  con- 
veyances, ifcc.  At  first,  he  may  have  lived  in  the  house  he 
bought  of  his  brother,  in  1691.  Afterwards,  before  Jan., 
1703-1,  he  resided  on  the  north  side,  near  the  west  end  of 
West  Main  street,  on  a  lot  of  one  acre  and  three  quarters,  re- 
corded April  27,  1717,  and  bounded  north  and  south  on  high- 
way, east  and  west  on  the  heirs  of  John  Eichason,  dec'd. 
lie  signed  his  name  by  proxy,  as  did  several  of  his  brothers. 
The  story  of  his  captivity  by  the  Indians,  in  1710,  I  have  al- 
ready related.  He  ultimately,  or  soon  after  1720,  removed  to 
Wooster  Swamj:),  in  the  north  part  of  Watertown,  near  Scott's 
Mountain,  where  he  built  a  saw  mill,  (spoken  of  in  1725,  as 
belonging  to  him  and  his  son  Jonathan,)  and  lived  with  his 
sons.  The  tradition  is  that  he  was  buried  on  Scott's  Moun- 
tain, and  his  supposed  grave  is  still  pointed  out.  That  part  of 
the  tradition,  however,  which  relates  to  the  circumstances  and 
time  of  his  death,  as  that  he  died  by  violence  on  his  way  to 
the  north,  at  the  hands  of  the  Indians,  after  having  had  his 
tongue  cut  out,  is  without  foundation  in  fact.  He  is  believed 
to  have  been  the  earliest  permanent  settler  of  present  Water- 
toM-n.     He  d.  May  15,  1715,  and  his  wife,  April  7,  1741. 

Children : 

1.  A  daughter;  b.  and  d.  Aug.  1695. 

2.  Jonathan;  b.  Sept.  29,  1096.  After  his  return  (in  1715)  from  captivity,  he 
was  made  a  £40  proprietor.  In  1122,  he  was  chosen  pound  keeper,  and  in  1723, 
surveyor,  soon  after  which  he  appears  to  have  removed  to  Wooster  Swamp,  at 
which  place  he  had  much  land  laid  out  on  his  own  right  and  on  that  which  was 
his  uncle  Eobert's. 

3.  John  ;  b.  June  5,  1699.  He  is  said  never  to  have  returned  from  his  captiv- 
ity, in  1709. 

4.  Martha  ;  b.  July  9,  1701 ;  m.  Joseph  Hurlbut  of  Woodbury. 

5.  Gershom  ;  b.  Sept.  6,  1703,  and  d.  June  24,  1780.  His  father  gave  him  a 
house  and  lands  at  Wooster  Swamp  in  1731. 

6.  Eleazer  ;  b.  Dec.  31,  1705.  His  father  gave  him  a  house  and  three  acres  of 
land  at  Wooster  Swamp  in  1733. 


186  HISTOKY   OF   WATERBUEY. 

1.  Danic4  ;  b.  Sept.  20,  1101.  In  1735,  his  father  gave  hun  a  part  of  his  home- 
stead, three  acres.     He  was  a  doctor. 

JOHN  SCOYILL. 

He  was  an  early  settler  of  Farmington,  and  a  proprietor  of 
1672.  As  a  proprietor  of  Waterbmy,  he  was  accepted  Jan.  15, 
1677-8,  as  a  substitute  for  Abraham  Bronson.  He  probably  did 
not  join  the  settlement  till  late  in  1678.  His  name  is  found  in 
the  second  and  fourth  divisions  of  fence,  and  is  on  the  list 
of  those  who  had  old  town  plot  lots.  He  was  one  of  those  who 
tried  the  patience  of  the  committee,  till  at  last  his  rights  were  de- 
clared forfeited.  He  recovered  his  allotments  by  submitting,  <fec. 
He  lived  on  a  lot  of  two  acres  on  the  corner  of  West  Main 
and  Willow  streets,  where  Mrs.  Bennet  Bronson  now  resides. 
But  he  found  living  in  Waterbury  a  serious  business,  became 
discouraged,  and  went  away.  I  know  not  the  exact  time.  He 
was  not  a  subscriber  to  Mr.  Peck's  settlement  in  1689,  but  he 
may,  notwithstanding,  have  been  in  town  at  the  time.  In 
1696,  he  was  "  of  Haddam,"  and  July  ISth  of  that  year,  he 
conveyed  by  deed  "  for  divers  valuable,  good  and  lawful 
causes  and  considerations "  to  his  "  well  beloved  son  John 
Scovill  and  his  heirs  for  ever,"  all  his  estate  in  Waterbury — 
his  lands  and  rights  of  land,  divided  and  undivided,  including 
his  house  and  house  lot  of  two  acres,  (butted  south  and  east  on 
highway,  north  and  west  on  Dea.  Judd's  land,)  together, 
with  nine  other  parcels  of  land.  He,  however,  reserved  an  in- 
terest in  the  estate  of  the  value  of  ten  pounds,  the  income  of 
which  was  to  be  paid  to  his  wife  during  her  natural  life, 
"  should  it  please  God  to  take  me  away  before  her,"  &c. 

There  was  a  William  Scovill,  in  Haddam,  who  settled 
there,  according  to  Field,  about  1686.  There  was  also  an  Ed- 
ward Scofell,  or  Scovill,  who  died  there  in  1703.  I  know 
nothing  of  their  relationship  to  John  of  Waterbury. 

John  Scovill  was  m.  March  20, 1666,  to  Sarah,  d.  of  Thomas 
Barnes  of  Farmington,  and  died  in  Haddam  in  1712. — Estate 
£176.  But  little  is  known  of  his  children.  Kev.  W.  S.  Por- 
ter gives  the  names  of  four  : 

1.  Mehitable ;  m.  Feb.  15,  1685,  Caleb  Hopkins. 

2.  Eleazer  ;  m.  Abagail  Langdon. 

3.  Samuel,  (of  Watertown,  Mass. ;)  m.  Ruth  Langdon. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBUET.  187 

4.  John;  ni.  Feb.  6,  1693-4,  Hannah,  d.  of  Obadiah  Richards.  He  had  his  first 
grant  of  laud  in  Waterbury,  Jan.  21,  1089-90,  on  condition  that  he  should  build  a 
house,  &c.,  a  condition  from  which  he  was  afterwards,  after  his  father's  removal,  re- 
leased. When  the  grant  was  made,  he  had  probably  just  reached  the  age  of  twenty- 
one  years.  It  was  customary  to  notice  the  young  men  at  that  age,  in  a  similar  way, 
for  their  encouragement.  He  lived  where  his  father  did.  He  was  a  man  of  con- 
siderable influence,  and  was  engaged  to  some  extent  in  the  public  business.  He  was 
school  committee  ;  collector  of  the  town  and  minister's  rates;  grand  juror;  towns- 
man in  1698,  1699,  1702,1703;  constable  in  1707  and  1715;  deputy  to  the 
Colonial  Assembly  in  May,  1714,  and  "keeper  of  the  pound  key,"  in  1725,  and 
afterwards.  He  had  reputation  as  a  military  man,  and  rose  to  the  rank  of  ser- 
geant, as  early  as  1718.  He  d.  Feb.  26,  1726-7,  aged,  probably,  about  58.  His 
wife  d.  "  March  5,  1720." — Estate  £1061,  15s.  His  house  and  house  lot  were 
appraised  at  £  120.  His  son  John,  (born  Jan.  12,  1694-5,)  was  accepted  as  a 
"  bachelor,"  in  1715.  The  last  was  constable  in  1729;  pound  keeper  for  many 
years;  townsman  often;  a  deputy,  May,  1745,  and  a  lieutenant.  He  too  lived  on 
the  family  homestead,  (as  did  his  son  Obadiah,)  and  died  April  28,  1759. 

Rev.  JOHN  SOUTHMAYD. 
He  was  the  great  grandson  of  Sir  AVilliam  Soutlimayd  of 
the  county  of  Kent,  England,  to  whom  arms  were  granted  in 
June,  1604.  A  son  of  the  latter,  named  AVilliam,  came  to  this 
country.  His  name  is  in  the  "  quarterly  files "  of  Salem, 
Mass.,  where  this  entry  is  found  : 

John  Southmate  sonne  of  Will  Southmate  by  millissen  his  wife  borne  26""  of  the 
8""  mo.  1645 — willia""  southmayd  the  elder  sonne  of  william  southmayd  by  mil- 
lissen his  wife  born  the  17'**.  of  the  7"».  mo.  1643. 

william  southmayd. 

[Manuscript  letter  from  Rev.  Daniel  S.  Southmayd,  Concord,  Mass.,  Nov.  1829.] 

Kothing  more  is  known  of  William  Southmayd,  of  Essex 
county,  Mass.,  or  of  his  son  John  named  above.  His  "elder 
sonne  "  William,  father  of  the  Eev.  John,  removed  to  Middle- 
town  about  1660.  In  October,  1673,  he  married  Esther, 
daughter  of  Giles  Hamlin,*  and  had  the  following  children 
1.  William  ;  born  July  24, 1674,  and  died  an  infant.  2.  Jolm 
b.  August  23,  1676.  3.  William  ;  b.  March  6,  1679,  and  died 
an  infant.  4.  Giles;  b.  Jan.  17,1680-1;  d.  1728,  childless. 
5.  Esther ;  b.  Oct.  28,  1682  and  d.  Dec.  29,  1682.  Esther,  the 
wife,  d.  Nov.  11,  1682  and  Wm.  Southmayd  m,  Margaret, 

*  Mr.  Hamlin  was  one  of  the  early  settlers  of  Middletown.  He  married  Esther  Crowe,  a 
daughter  of  John  Crowe  of  Hartford,  and  a  granddaughter  of  Elder  William  Goodwin.  Their 
children  were,  Esther,  John,  Mary,  Giles,  Mehitable,  William.  Mr.  Hamlin  was  one  of  the 
prominent  men  of  his  times.  He  was  commissioner,  a  member  of  the  Council,  and  several  times 
a  deputy  to  the  General  Court.    He  died  Sep.  1, 16S9. 


188  HISTOKY   OF   WATEKBUKY. 

daughter  of  Col.  John  Allyii  of  Hartford,  loDg  secretary  of 
the  Colony.  Their  children  were  :  1.  Allyn  ;  b.  Feb.  7, 1685; 
lived  to  an  old  age  and  d.  at  St.  Johns,  New  Foundland.  2. 
Daniel;  b.  Sep.  1687;  d.  liov.  23,  1703.  3.  Margaret;  b. 
Aug.  11,  1691.  4.  Anna;  b.  Jan.  10,  1693.  5.  Joseph;  b. 
March  1 5,  1695,  and  d.  1772.  6.  William  ;  b.  Jan.  9, 1698,  and 
d.  1747.  7.  Meliscent;  b.  Jan.  3, 1700  ;  d.  Dec.  12, 1717.  From 
Joseph  and  William  have  descended  the  Soutlmiayds  of  Mid- 
dletown  and  Yermont.  William  Southmayd,  the  father,  d. 
Dec.  4,  1702.  He  called  himself  a  mariner.  His  inventory 
bears  date  Feb.  23,  1702-3,  and  amounted  to  £1,085,  17s.  6d. 
His  wife  d.  a  widow,  March  16,  1732-3. 

E.ev,  John  Southmayd's  home  lot  (previously  called  "  a 
great  lot")  at  first  contained  but  two  acres  ;  but  for  his  better 
accommodation,  the  town  obtained  for  him,  by  exchange,  in 
1704,  the  lot  next  adjoining  on  the  east,  then  owned  by 
Thomas  Judd,  Jr.  The  house  built  for  him  was  a  frame  house, 
and  was  fortified  in  the  Indian  wars. 

Mr.  Southmayd,  in  1700,  married  Susanna  Ward,  a  daugliter 
of  William  and  Phebe  Ward.     Their  children  were  : 

1.  Esther;  b.  Sep  1'2,  1701  ;  m.  Capt.  Daniel  Starr,  of  Middletown.  She  had 
several  children,  and  died  a  widow  at  an  advanced  age. 

2.  Susanna;  b.  Jan.  5,  1703-4;  m.  Sep.  25,  1734,  .Thomas  Bronsou,  son  of 
Thomas,  and  d.  Aug  13,  1741. 

3.  Anne;  b.  Oct.  27,  1706;  m.  Joseph  Bronson,  son  of  John,  June  1,  1732,. 
and  d.  Aug.  12,  1749. 

4.  John;  b.  June  21,  1710;  m.  Miliscent,  d.  of  Samuel  Gaylard  of  Middletown, 
April  2.5,  1739.  He  d.  Feb.  28,  1742-3,  leaving  two  children,  William  and 
Samuel,  both  of  whom  left  families.  The  widow  m.  Timothy  Judd,  son  of  William 
Judd. 

5.  Daniel ;  b.  April  19, 1717  ;  m.  Hannah,  d.  of  Samuel  Brown,  March  24,  1749  ; 
had  three  children,  Anne,  John  and  Daniel,  (all  of  whom  lived  to  be  marrried,) 
and  d.  Jan.  12,  1754. 

JOHN  STANLEY. 

Tlie  grandfather  of  the  Waterbury  Stanleys,  Jolm  Stanley, 
is  said  to  have  died  on  his  passage  over  from  England,  leaving 
a  son  John  and  a  daughter  Ruth,  both  of  whom  were  mar- 
ried (the  same  day)  Dec.  5,  1645,  the  latter  to  Isaac  More. 
John,  the  son,  was  a  nephew  of  Timothy  Stanley  of  Cam- 
bridge and  Hartford. 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUKY.  189 

John  Stanley,  tlie  father  of  our  proprietors,  was  born  in 
1625;  came  to  New  Enghind  in  1634:;  settled  in  Farmington 
early  ;  joined  the  church  there,  July  12,  1653  ;  was  a  deputy 
to  the  General  Court  from  F.  four  sessions,  lirst  in  1 659  ;  saw 
service  in  King  Philip's  war  as  lieutenant  and  captain,  and  was 
one  of  the  leading  men  of  Farmington. 

John  Stanley  ^of  F.  m.  Dec.  5,  1645,  Sarah,  d.  of  Thomas 
Scott,  and  June  26,  1661,  Sarah,  d.  of  John  Fletcher  of  Mil- 
ford.  He  d.  Dec.  19,  1706,  and  his  second  wife  and  widow, 
May  15,  1713.  His  children  were:  1.  John  ;  b.  in  Hartford, 
Nov.  3,  1647.  2.  Thomas;  b.  in  Farmington,  Nov.  1,  1649  ; 
m.,  in  1690,  Anne,  d.  of  Rev.  Jeremiah  Peck,  and  d.  May 
23,  1718.  3.  Sarah  ;  b.  Feb.  1651-2,  and  m.  Joseph  Gay- 
lord.  4.  Timothy ;  b.  March  17,  1653-4.  5.  Elizabeth  ; 
b.  April  1,  1657,  and  d.  young.  6.  Abigail ;  b.  July  25, 
1669  ;  m.  Nov.  1687,  John  Hooker.  7.  Elizabeth  ;  b.  Nov.  28, 
1672;  m.  John  Wadsworth,  and  d.  Oct.  6,  1713.  8.  Isaac  ; 
b.  Sept.  22,  1660,  and  appears  to  have  been  an  imbecile.  By 
the  will  of  his  father,  he  could  not  dispose  of  the  estate  given 
him  without  the  consent  of  his  brothers,  John  Stanley  and 
John  Hooker. 

JOHN  STANLEY. 

John  Stanley,  son  of  Capt.  John  of  F.,  was  one  of  the  eigh- 
ty-four proprietors  of  that  town  in  1672.  He  signed  the  peti- 
tion to  the  General  Court  concerning  Mattatuck,  in  1673,  and 
subscribed  the  articles  of  settlement  in  1674,  taking  a  £100 
right.  He  was  one  of  the  assignees  to  whom  the  first  Indian 
deed  of  lands  in  Mattatuck  was  made  over,  and  a  grantee,  by 
name,  in  the  subsequent  deeds.  He  came  very  early  to  our 
town,  but  may  not  have  been  with  the  first  'company  of  set- 
tlers ;  for  he  had  no  allotment  of  fence  in  the  first  division 
made  in  the  spring  of  1677-8.  In  no  other  division  is  his 
name  omitted.  After  having  once  put  his  hand  to  the  plow, 
there  is  no  appearance  of  his  looking  back  ;  at  any  rate,  till 
some  broad  furrows  had  been  traced.  He  was,  more  than 
any  other  man,  with  the  exception  of  Thomas  Judd,  Sen.,  the 
ruling  spirit  and  father  of  the  settlement.     He  was  often  se- 


190  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUEY. 

lected  by  the  Assembly's  committee  to  act  in  their  absence. 
He  laid  out  the  lots  of  the  proprietors,  staked  out  and  appor- 
tioned the  common  fence,  "  located  "  highways,  settled  bomi- 
daries  of  adjoining  towns,  &c.  Thomas  Judd  was  usually  his 
associate.  He  was  the  first  recorder  of  the  town  and  propri- 
etors, apjDointed  first  by  the  committee  and  afterwards  by  the 
town.  His  first  recorded  appointment  by  the  latter  w^as  Dec. 
26,  16S2,  and  he  was  annually  reappointed  till  his  removal  to 
Farmington.  So  far  as  appears,  he  was  the  only  person 
among  the  earliest  proprietors  of  Mattatuck,  who  was  fully 
qualified  for  the  office.  He  wrote  a  legible  and  business-like 
hand. 

John  Stanley  was  a  sergeant  in  the  Waterbury  traui-band, 
in  April,  1682,  and  afterwards,  when  no  higher  officer  was 
permitted.  In  Oct,  1689,  when  a  lieutenant  was  allowed,  he 
was  the  first  selected  for  that  office.  His  appointment  was 
confirmed  by  the  Assembly,  Oct.  1689.  It  was  a  distinguish- 
ed honor,  and  no  doubt  he  bore  it  worthily.  After  Waterbury 
began  to  send  a  representative  to  the  General  Court,  Lieut. 
Stanley  was  the  second  whose  name  is  recorded.  He  was_^a 
deputy  in  May,  1690,  and  in  May,  1693.  What  persuaded 
him  finally  to  quit  the  settlement,  in  a  time  of  great  affliction, 
I  am  not  able  to  say.  It  is  to  be  hoped  he  had  better  reasons 
than  any  that  can  be  thought  of  at  this  distant  day.  His  loss 
must  have  been  seriously  felt.  He  returned  to  Farmington 
early  in  1695,  or  before  April  9tli  of  that  year,  where  he  was 
a  deacon  in  1711  and  afterwards.  He,  how^ever,  retained 
most  of  his  lands  in  Waterbury  and  his  propriety  right,  and 
was  a  frequent  visitor  to  the  town  to  look  after  his  estate. 
His  familiarity  with  the  records  of  the  town  was  the  cause  of 
his  appointment,  in  1705,  to  copy,  for  the  purpose  of  preserva- 
tion, such  portions  as  were  most  important.  He  gave  some 
attention  to  the  duties  of  this  appointment  from  time  to  time. 

John  Stanley  lived  near  the  old  meeting-house  and  near 
the  place  where  the  Second  Congregational  Church  now^ 
stands.  His  lot  contained  three  and  a  half  acres,  and  was 
bounded,  Sept.  29,  1687,  westwardly  on  highway,  northwardly 
on  Isaac  Bronson's  land,  southwardly  on  Joseph  Gaylord's 
land,  and  east  on  the  common. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUEY.  191 

Jolm   Stanley  m.  in  1669,  Estlier,  d.  of  Thomas  Newell  of 
Farmington,  and  d.  May  16,  1729.     His  widow  d.  in  1740. 
Children  : 

1.  Esther  ;  b.  in  Farmington,  Dec.  2,  I6l2,  and  d.  lfiV6. 

2.  John  ;  b.  in  F.  April  9,  1675  ;  m.  Dec.  U,  1714,  Mary  AYright,  and  d.  Sept. 
8,  1748,  leaving  three  children,  John,  Thomas  and  Mary.  He  lived  in  Kensing- 
ton. Though  accepted  as  a  bachelor  proprietor  of  Waterbiiry,  in  1715,  there  is 
no  trace  of  him  as  an  inhabitant  after  his  father's  removal  in  1(595. 

3.  Samuel;  b.  1677;  m.  July  15,  1702,  Elizabeth,  d.  of  Abraham  Bronson  of 
Lyme,  and  had  six  children  born  in  Waterbury,  the  two  last  twins — Samuel,  Abra- 
ham, John,  Esther,  Ebenezer  and  Anna,  (b.  "March  8,  1713;")  two,  Elizabeth 
and  Asa,  b.  in  1715  and  1717  in  Farmington  and  recorded  in  Waterbury  ;  and  one 
or  two  others,  Ruth  and  Josiah?     The  father  d.  in  1747. 

Samuel  Stanley  was  a  carpenter  and  mill-wright ;  townsman  in  1704  and  1705  ; 
collector  of  town  taxes  in  1707;  school  committee  in  1711  and  1712,  &c.  He 
lived  on  the  old  homestead  of  his  father,  in  whom  the  title  remained.  The  pro- 
perty was  sold,  July  9,  1714,  to  Ephraim  Warner,  for  £45,  the  deed  being  signed 
by  both  father  and  son.  Soon  after  the  date  of  this  deed,  Samuel  Stanley  re- 
moved. He  lived  in  Wallingford,  Farmington  and  Durham.  He  was  admitted  a 
bachelor  proprietor  in  1715. 

4.  Nathaniel;  b.  1679;  m.  Sarah,  d.  of  Samuel  Smith  of  Fai'mington,  where  he 
lived  and  had  nine  children,  and  then  removed  (after  1739)  to  Goshen,  and  d. 
1770. 

5.  Thomas  ;  baptized  May  25,  1684,  at  Farmington ;  m.  1690,  Anne,  daughter 
of  Rev.  Jeremiah  Peck.  He  had  a  son  Thomas  and  a  daughter  Anne  living  in 
1728. 

C.   Sarah  ;   bap.  July  4,  1686,  at  F, 

7.  Timothy  ;  b.  June  6,  1689  ;*  bap.  in  F.  May  11,  1790;  m.  Dec.  15,  1718,  Mar. 
tha,  d.  of  Samuel  Smith  of  F.  ;  had  seven  children  b.  in  F.,  four  of  whom  died  in 
infancy.  He  removed  to  Goshen  after  1735  and  before  1742,  and  d.  1761.  He  was 
a  captain  and  the  owner  and  emancipator  of  a  slave. 

TIMOTHY  STANLEY. 
He  was  in  INIattatuck  sufficiently  early  to  have  an  old  town 
plot  lot,  and  an  allotment  in  all  the  divisions  of  fence.  In 
1682-3,  however,  he  was  condemned  for  delinquency  ;  but  he 
soon  made  amends,  and  regained  what  he  had  lost.  He  w^as 
one  of  the  two  first  townsmen  (appointed,  probably,  in  1680) 
whose  names  are  recorded.  He  held  the  same  office  in  1702 
and  afterwards.  He  w^as  school  committee  often ;  moderator 
of  proprietors'  meeting  in  1706  ;  grand  juror  in  1713.  In  Oct. 
1691,  he  was  sent  as  deputy  to  the  General  Court,  being  the 

*  This  birth  is  recorded  by  the  father  in  AVaterbury,  and  it  is  the  only  one  of  the  family  that 
is  so  recorded. 


192  HISTORY    OF    WATERBUEY. 

third  person  that  received  that  honor.  He  hehl  the  same 
office  May,  1695,  1696  and  1699,  May  and  Oct.  1708, 1709  and 
1711,  and  Oct.  1718.  For  a  short  period,  in  1704-5,  after 
Lieut.  Judd's  death,  he  appears  to  have  held  the  office  of  justice 
of  the  peace.  In  military  rank  he  seems,  in  the  first  instance, 
to  have  ranked  fourth.  He  was  sergeant  in  1695,  ensign  in 
1696,  and  lieutenant  and  chief  in  command  in  1703,  which  last 
office  he  held  through  a  Critical  period  till  1715. 

Timothy  Stanley  called  himself  "cloath  weur"  in  1716-17. 
His  standing  among  his  fellow  townsmen  may  he  gathered 
from  the  responsible  positions  he  occupied.  His  house  stood 
on  the  spot  where  Capt.  Lemuel  Harrison  now  lives.  It  was 
one  of  the  fortified  houses  in  the  Indian  war.  His  lot  of  two 
acres  was  bounded,  in  Kov.  1687,  north  and  south  on  high- 
way, west  on  John  Carrington's  land,  east  on  Daniel  Porter's 
land.  In  June,  1713,  Stanley  deeded  to  his  wife's  nephew, 
Thomas  Clark,  his  adopted  son,  one  half  of  his  house  and 
homestead  and  other  lands,  divided  and  undivided,  Clark 
agreeing  "to  take  care  of  s**  Stanley  and  his  wife  and  carion 
all  the  work  of  the  family  or  families  wn  [when]  there  shall 
be  need  with  y^  help  of  s,^  Standley  and  the  rest  of  y'  family 
ye  whole  income  of  y^  estate  to  be  to  y"  use  of  both  as  they 
shall  need,"  &c. 

Timothy  Stanley  m.  in  1676,  Mary,  d.  of  John  Strong 
of  Windsor,  and  d.  childless,  Nov.  12,  1728.  His  wife 
Mary  d.  Sep.  30,  1722.  Thomas  Clark  was  his  executor  and 
principal  heir.  The  estate  in  Waterbury  amounted  to  £703, 
and  in  Farmington  to  £108.  The  will  mentions  Thomas  Clark 
and  Sarah  his  wife,  and  their  children  ;  Timothy,  Samuel, 
Nathaniel  and  John  Stanley,  sons  of  John,  the  brother  of  the 
testator;  Joseph,  John  and  Benjamin  Gay  lord ;  Ruth  Hickox 
and  Johannah  Eoyce,  children  of  Sarah  Gaylord,  the  sister  of 
the  deceased. 

Timothy  Stanley  and  his  wife  were  buried  near  the  spot 


burv 


mg   ji 


^CaMyAJ^nTlJCV^ 


HISTOKY   OF   WATEEBURY.  193 

STEPHEN  UPSON. 

The  father,  Thomas  Upsoii,  was  early  in  Hartford,  He  was 
one  of  tliose,  not  proj^rietors,  enumerated  in  1638,  who  had 
the  privilege  of  getting  wood  and  keeping  cows  on  the 
common.  In  that  year,  he  (with  others)  was  "  censured  and 
iined  for  vnseasonable  and  immoderate  drinking  at  the 
pinnace,"  20s,  He  was  an  original  proprietor  and  settler  of 
Farmington,  and  m.in  1616,  Elizabeth  Fuller.  He  d,  July  19, 
1655,  and  a  daughter  named  Elizabeth  d,  the  next  day.  The 
widow  m.  Edmund  Scott.  Tlie  estate,  which  was  small,  was 
distributed  in  1671,  to  the  remaining  children,  Thomas, 
Stephen,  Mary,  Hannah,  and  to  Edmund  Scott  in  right  of  his 
wife, 

Stephen  Upson  was  not  one  of  the  first  company  of  pro- 
prietors and  settlers  of  Waterbury,  He  was  accepted,  (or 
rather  signed  the  articles  by  a  mark,)  Dec,  29,  1679,  not  as 
the  substitute  of  another,  but  as  the  record  says,  "  on  the 
account  of  a  new  lot,"  He  had  a  £50  propriety  and  an  allot- 
ment in  the  second  and  fourth  divisions  of  fence  ;  but  he  had 
not  one  of  the  old  town  plot  lots,  these  being  divided  among 
the  original  thirty  subscribers,  or  their  substitutes  and  suc- 
cessors. In  1680-81,  he  was  "straitened"  for  land,  and  the 
committee  on  petition  granted  relief.  He  does  not  appear  to 
have  faltered  inexcusably  in  his  duty  as  a  subscriber  of  the 
articles.  His  name  does  not  frequently  appear  on  the  earlier 
records,  (before  1700,)  except  as  tlie  grantee  of  lands.  He 
signed  the  £60  agreement  with  Mr.  Peek  and  was  one  of  a 
committee  to  settle  bounds  with  Woodbury  in  April,  1702. 
He  was  surveyor,  school  committee,  grand  juror,  often  towns- 
man, and  three  times  deputy  to  the  General  Court — in  May, 
1710,  Oct.  1712,  and  Oct.  1729.  He  became  a  sergeant  in 
1715,  and  in  1729,  he  had  a  seat  with  the  veterans  in  the  new 
meeting-house. 

Stephen  Upson,  "  carpenter, "  lived  on  the  east  side  of 
Bank  street,  near  where  the  house  of  E.  E.  Prichard  now 
stands.  His  lot  contained  four  acres  and  was  bounded,  Feb. 
10,  16S7-S,  southerly  on  Samuel  Scott's  land,  northerly  on 
parsonage  lot,  west  and  east  on  highways.  In  Dec.  1697,  he 
13 


19i  niSTOEY   OF   WATEKBUKY. 

excliangecl  with  the  town  two  acres  at  the  east  end  of  his  lot 
for  the  two  acres  lying  next  him  on  the  north  called  the 
parsonage  lot. 

Stephen  Upson  m.  December  29,  1682,  Mary  d.  of  John 
Lee,  Sen.,  of  Farmington,  and  d.  in  1735,  aged  80,  or  over. 
His  wife  d.  Yeh.  15,  1715-16.  His  will  was  dated  l^ov.  8, 
1713,  and  proved  Jnly  3,  1735.  Estate,  £520,  17s.  He  had, 
during  his  lifetime,  given  much  of  his  property  to  his 
children. 

Children : 

1.  Mary;  b.  Xov.  5,  1G83  ;  m.  Richard  Welton,  son  of  John. 

2.  Stephen;  b.  Sep.  30,  1686;  was  accepted  as  a  bachelor  proprietor,  Jan, 
1705-6;  m.  Sarah,  d.  of  Isaac  Bronson  and  d.  Sep.  10,  1777.  His  wife  d.  1748. 
His  house  was,  at  first,  on  the  southwest  corner  of  Grand  and  Bank  streets.  The 
land  on  which  he  had  already  built,  in  1718,  described  as  three  acres,  "just  by 
the  south  meadow  gate  and  within  the  common  fence, "  his  father  gave  him  at 
that  date.  June  28,  1733,  he  sold  and  conveyed  this  place,  described  now  as  five 
acres,  with  a  house  and  barn,  to  James  Prichard,  and  the  same  day  received  a  deed 
from  his  father  of  the  family  homestead,  four  acres,  bounded  west  on  highway, 
north  on  John  Puuderson's  land,  east  on  Thomas  Upson's  and  Thomas  Porter's 
land,  south  on  Thomas  Porter. 

Stephen  Upson,  Jr.,  repfesentcd  the  town  in  the  Colonial  Assemlily,  in  Oct. 
1743,  at  which  time  he  bore  the  title  of  captain. 

3.  Elizabeth;  b.  Feb.  14,  1689-90,  and  m.  Thomas  Bronson. 

4.  Thomas  ;  b.  March  1,  1692-3  ;  was  accepted  as  a  £40  proprietor  in  1715;  m. 
Rachel,  d.  of  Dea.  Thomas  Judd,  and  d.  in  1761.  He  lived  on  Cole  street,  near 
East  Main,  on  the  place  owned  first,  by  John  Richards.  His  father  bought  it  of 
Benjamin  Warner,  executor  of  Thomas  Warner,  and  in  1718,  gave  it  to  the  son,  " 
with  the  house.  In  the  deed  making  this  grant,  the  father  "thinks  it  reason- 
able to  consider"  his  sons  "above"  his  daughters,  in  the  distribution  of  his 
estate,  and  orders  the  gift  "  not  to  be  recorded  as  part  or  portion  in  the  distri- 
bution" of  his  estate  among  his  children.  In  Feb.  1732-3,  Thomas  Upson  sold 
out  to  Jonathan  Baldwin  for  £150  monej^,  the  property  being  described  as  "three 
and  a  half  acres  of  land  with  a  house  and  barn, "  &c.  He  then  removed  to 
Farmington,  afterwards  Southington,  and  now  the  eastern  part  of  Wolcott, 
(Southington  Mountain.) 

5.  Hannah;  b.  "  abought  March  16,  1695;"  m.  Thomas  Richards  and  John 
Bronson,  and  was  living  a  widow,  in  1751. 

6.  Tabitha;  b.  "March  11,  1698,"  and  m.  John  Scovill,  2d. 

7.  John ;  b.  Dec.  13,  1702,  and  m.  Elizabeth,  d.  of  Thomas  Judd.  He  appears 
to  have  resided,  for  several  years,  after  1732-3,  in  Farmington,  though  the 
births   of  his  children,  down  to  1745,  are  recorded  in  Waterbury. 

8.  Thankful;  b.  March  14,  1706-7,  and  m.  James  Blakeslee. 


niSTOKT    OF   WATERBUEY.  195 


WARNER. 


Joliii  Warner,  Sen.  lived  first  in  Hartford,  then  in  Farming- 
ton.  Of  the  hitter  town  he  was  an  original  proprietor  and  set- 
tler. He  was  one  of  the  Pequot  soldiers,  and  for  his  services 
had  a  grant  of  land,  in  1671,  from  the  General  Court,  fiftj 
acres,  which  Serg.  Thomas  Judd  and  Serg.  John  Stanley  were 
appointed  to  lay  out  to  his  heirs  in  Oct.  1689.  He  was  one  of 
the  petitioners  who  asked  liberty  '•  to  make  a  small  plantation 
at  Mattatuck,"  (as  were  his  sons  John  and  Daniel,)  and  signed 
the  articles  of  1674,  writing  his  name  John  Warner,  Sen.  He 
intended  to  join  the  new  settlement  but  died  before  removal, 
in  1679.  His  will,  dated  in  March  of  that  year,  names  as  his 
children,  John,  Daniel,  Thomas,  Sarah.  The  last  was  baptized 
March  15,  1656-7,  and  m.  William  Higason. 

JOHN  WARNER,  (Jr.) 

Both  he  and  his  father  John  are  on  the  list  of  the  freemen 
of  F.  in  1669,  and  on  the  list  of  proprietors  of  1672.  He  sub- 
scribed the  articles  in  1674,  and  made  an  early  movement  to 
secure  his  right.     His  name  is  in  all  the  fence-divisions. 

John  Warner,  called  Sen.  on  the  AVaterbury  records,  had 
recorded,  Feb.  19,  1702-3,  one  acre  and  a  half  of  land  on 
which  his  dwelling-house  then  stood,  east  on  Jonathan  Scott's 
house  lot,  north,  south  and  west  on  highway.  There  is  some 
difficulty  in  ascertaining  where  tliis  lot  was  situated.  Though 
there  is  something  not  quite  intelligible  about  the  west  boun- 
dary, I  have  ventured  to  place  it  on  the  north  side  of  West 
Main  street,  near  to  Willow  street.  He  owned  land  next  west 
of  Eobert  Porter  in  1687-8.  He  sold  the  place,  March  4, 
1704r-5,  to  John  Judd,  and  Judd  conveyed  it,  Kov.  5,  17'15, 
to  Joseph  Hickox  of  Durham,  and  Hickox  deeded  it,  the  same 
day,  to  Elizabeth  Kichasou,  widow  and  administrator  of  John 
Richason,  the  boundaries  being  the  same  as  when  owned  by 
Warner. 

History  has  but  little  to  say  of  John  Warner,  Sen.,  of  Water- 
bury.  He  returned  to  Farmington  soon  after  1700.  He  call- 
ed himself  "  of  Farmington  "  in  a  deed,  in  April,  1703,  and 
again  in  1705-6 ;   and   yet  in  his  will,    dated  Farmington, 


196  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

Dec.  27,  1700,  lie  speaks  of  liiniself  as  "  of  Waterbury."  He 
died  soou  after  tlie  las^^  date,  liis  inventory  being  taken  March, 
1706-7.  Ilis  personal  estate  was  valued  at  £71,  and  his  real 
estate  was  given  by  will,  his  house  and  homestead  in  Water- 
bury  to  his  sou  John.  John  "Warner  and  Samuel  Bronson 
(son-in-law)  were  executors.  His  will  (he  signed  by  a  mark, 
as  did  his  brother  Thomas)  names  five  cliildren.  Thomas  is 
not  mentioned, 

1.  John;  b.  March  1,  UlO;  m.  Sept.  28,  1698,  Rebecca,  d.  of  Thomas  Richa. 
son.  He  d.  March  3,  1751,  and  his  wife  Aug  1,  1748.  He  was  made  a  £40  pro- 
prietor, March  26,  1699,  his  right  being  entered  in  1722  and  afterwards  as 
"John  Warner,  Sen.,  bach,  lot."  He  had  a  grant  of  land  of  twenty-five  acres  in 
1690,  he  to  build,  &c.  As  early  as  April  20,  1703,  he  seems  to  have  been  living 
on  Buclfshill.  At  that  date  he  sold  land  adjoining  him  to  Joseph  Gaylord,  Jr. 
He  appears  to  have  been  the  first  settler  on  Buckshill.  Here  he  remained  seve- 
ral years,  but  at  length  removed  to  Stratford,  He  was  in  the  latter  place  June, 
1715,  at  which  time  he  sold  to  Daniel  Shelton  of  said  Stratford  thirty-three  acres 
of  land  and  a  house  on  Buckshill.  About  1723,  he  returned  to  Waterbury  and 
settled  in  that  part  of  the  town  afterwards  called  Westbury.  Here  he  had  pre- 
viously much  land  laid  out,  and  here  he  had  a  house  in  Dec.  1724,  near  Steel's 
Brook,  and  the  road  to  Wooster  Swamp.  At  this  time  and  after  his  return  from 
Stratford,  he  was  sometimes  called  Dr.  John  Warner,  as  though  he  had  been 
practicing  medicine  while  absent.  He  continued  in  this  occupation,  and  was  the 
first  physician  in  Westbury.  When  Westbury  became  a  separate  society  he  was 
made  the  first  deacon  of  the  church.     He  held  no  important  town  offices. 

2.  Ephraim;  m.  Esther,  d.  of  Obadiah  Richards,  Aug.  16,  1692,  and  d.  Aug.  1, 
1753,  in  the  eighty-fourth  year  of  his  age.  This  is  the  age  given  him  by  the 
record  ;  but  it  would  make  him  born  about  the  same  time  as  his  brother  John.  I  ' 
suppose  they  were  not  twins,  and  that  Ephraim  was  the  youngest ;  but  there  is  no 
conclusive  evidence  of  this.  He  liad  five  children  boi'n  in  Waterbury,  the  last  in 
Feb.  1702-3 ;  and  two  born,  I  suppose,  in  Woodbury,*  Ebenezer  and  Ephraim. 
All  outlived  their  father  except  Margaret  and  the  first  Ephraim.  The  estate  was 
first  settled  by  agreement  among  the  heirs,  and  afterwards  by  order  of  probate,  in 
1762,  there  being  probably  some  misunderstanding  about  the  first  settlement.  It 
amounted,  according  to  inventory,  to  but  £14, 19s.,  much  having  been  given  away 
to  the  children  during  the  lifetime  of  the  deceased. 

Eprhaim  Warner  had  his  first  grant  of  land,  Jan.  21,  1689-90,  on  the  northeast 
corner  of  W^illow  and  Grove  streets,  (bounded  south,  west  and  north  on  high- 
ways and  east  on  the  three  acre  lot  of  Thomas  Judd,  Sen.,)  on  condition  that  he 
should  erect  a  house  and  "  coinhabit  four  years,"  according  to  the  original  arti- 
cles. Here  he  seems  to  have  built  and  resided  till  about  Sept.  26,  1701,  when  he 
sold  out  to  Stephen  Welton.     He  next  had  a  house  and  forty-two  and  a  half  acres 

•*  It  is  not  certain  they  were  not  born  in  Waterbury  because  not  recorded.  It  was  common 
to  make  a  record  only  at  considerable  intervals,  and  then  record  several  together.  If  a  jierson 
died,  and  particularly  if  he  removed,  one  or  more  children  born  last  were  not  sure  to  be  re- 
corde<?' 


HISTORY    OF    WATEKBUKY.  197 

of  laud  on  Bucksliill,  which  he  exchanged,  Feb.  21,  1703-4,  with  Benjamin  War- 
ner for  a  house  and  four  acres  of  land,  the  land  in  two  pieces,  one  situated  on  the 
east,  the  other  on  the  west  side  of  Cook  street.  The  house  was  on  the  west 
side.  Here  he  resided  till  he  had  secured  his  £-10  right,  which  was  granted 
"March  18,  1701,"  and  then  removed  to  Woodbury.  In  April,  1714,  the  follow- 
ing vote  was  passed  in  town  meeting  : 

"The  town  to  encourage  Dr.  Ephraim  Warner  to  come  and  live  with  us  grant 
him  the  use  of  the  school  land  for  three  years  (only  one  half  the  lot  in  Ilancox's 
Meadow  is  exempted  this  year,)  he  to  maintain  the  fence." 

The  town  also  voted  him  ten  acres  in  the  sequester,  on  the  condition  that  he  re- 
mained four  years.  It  seems  he  had  been  practicing  medicine  in  Woodbury,  where 
his  brother  Ebenezer  was  engaged  in  the  same  calling,  and  the  Waterbury  people 
wanted  his  services.  He  may  have  served  them  as  physician  before  his  removal, 
Init  there  is  no  sufficient  evidence  of  this.  He  is  never  called  Doctor  on  the  record 
till  Dec.  1706,  and  then  it  is  not  clear  whether  he  was  in  Waterbury  or  Wood- 
bury. After  this  date,  his  name  is  not  mentioned  till  the  town  vote  soliciting  his 
return.  He  did  return  and  became  "  physician  "  or  "  practitioner  "  (as  he  is  called 
in  deeds)  of  the  town.  Dr.  Porter  being  surgeon,  or  more  properly  "bonesetter." 
He  appears  to  have  settled  on  Buckshill,  as  did  several  of  his  sous,  to  whom  he 
gave  houses  and  lands.  In  Aug.  1733,  he  conveyed  to  his  "  beloved  son  Ebene- 
zer" half  his  dwelling-house,  ("the  north  end,")  and  twenty  acres  of  land  on  the 
cast  -iide  the  highway,  opposite  his  (the  father's)  dwelUng-house,  and  half  the 
barn  ;  also,  "  the  smith's  shop  and  the  tools  for  smith  work,"  he  to  pay  his  broth- 
er Ephraim  £20  in  labor  in  twelve  months.  In  April,  1738,  he  had  removed  down 
nto  the  village,  and  occupied  the  northwest  corner  of  Cook  and  Grove  streets , 
which  he  had  previously  owned.  At  this  date,  for  £120  which  "he  would  bestow" 
on  his  son  Ephraim  "  as  his  part  or  portion,"  he  deeded  to  him  the  place,  described 
as  three  acres  and  a  half,  with  all  the  buildings  and  improvements,  north  and 
east  on  highways,  south  on  Thomas  Bronson,  west  on  Samuel  Scott,  the  grantor  re- 
serving the  use  of  one  half  the  property  during  his  life  and  during  the  life  of  his 
wife.  Afterwards,  Jan.  1742-3,  he  quit-claimed  to  Ephraim,  then  of  Farmington, 
the  whole  property. 

Dr.  Warner,  after  his  return  to  Waterbury,  became  one  of  the  "notabilities"  of 
the  town.  His  name  is  often  met  with  on  the  record.  He  bought  and  sold  rea  \ 
estate  to  a  large  extent,  and  was  engaged  in  "public  business.  He  was  towns- 
man, school  committee,  town  collector,  deputy  to  the  General  Court  in 
May,  1717,  May,  1719,  [May  and  Oct.  1720,  |and  May,  1722,  and  moderator  of 
town  meeting  in  173  0.  As  early  as  1722,  he  was  chosen  captain  of  the  train 
band,  and  was  the  second  who  was  thus  distinguished  in  the  town. — Benjamin 
Warner,  eldest  son  of  Dr.  Ephraim,  (b.  Sept.  30,  1698,)  was  accepted  as  a  £40 
proprietor,  Dec.  23,  1715.  He  died  in  April,  1772.  He  lived  on  Buckshill, 
(where  his  father  gave  him  a  house  and  lands,)  and  was  a  physician.  He  was 
called  "  Doctor  Ben,"  to  distinguish  him  from  his  father. — John  Warner,  second 
son  of  Dr.  Ephraim,  was  b.  June  24,  1700.  The  proprietors  granted  him  half  a 
bachelor  lot,  which  was  the  fourth  propriety  lot,  Xov.  28, 1722,  William  Scott  hav 
jng  the  other  half.  In  Dec.  1724,  his  father,  with  whom  he  then  lived,  gave  him 
twenty  acres  of  land  and  a  house  on  Buckshill,  valuing  them  to  him  "  at  £60 
money."  He  afterwards  removed  to  Northbury,  and  was  the  third  deacon  in  the 
Northbnry  church,  appointed  in  1746.     He  d.  Sept.  7,  1794. 


198  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUEY. 

3.  Robert ;  settled  in  Woodbury,  and  died  in  1759. 

4.  Ebenezer.  He  settled  in  Woodbury,  became  a  physician,  and  died  in  1169. 
CoL  Seth  Warner  of  the  Revolution  was  his  grandson.     (Cothren.) 

5.  Lydia;  bap.  March  13,  1680-81,  and  m.  Samuel  Bronson.  Her  father  in  his 
will  gave  to  her  his  "  beds  and  bedding,  furniture,  and  household  stuff." 

6.  Thomas;  baptized  May  6,  1683.     He  must  have  died  before  his  father. 

(Win.)  DANIEL  WARNER. 

It  lias  already  been  stated  that  Daniel  Warner,  one  of  tlie 
original  petitioners  and  first  subscribers,  died  in  Farmington, 
late  in  1679  ;  and  that  the  committee  bestowed  his  propriety  of 
£60  and  his  allotments  on  the  widow  and  her  children,  advis- 
ing her  to  erect  a  dwelling-house  "  with  all  possible  speed." 
She  followed  the  advice,  and  is  supposed  to  have  lived  on  the 
north  side  of  West  Main  street,  next  east  of  Thomas  Judd, 
Sen.,  on  a  lot  of  two  acres  which,  in  April,  1693,  stood  in  the 
name  of  her  son,  Daniel  Warner,  and  which  was  sold  by  him, 
at  that  date,  to  the  said  Judd,  butted  north  and  south  on  high- 
way, east  on  Obadiah  Eichards. 

I  know  not  who  were  the  children  of  Daniel  Warner  of  Far- 
mington, except  that  one  was 

Daniel.  He  settled  in  Waterbury,  and  came  into  the  possession  of  the  family 
right  in  the  undivided  lands.  His  first  recorded  grant  of  land  was  in  Jan.  1689-90> 
about  the  period  probably  of  his  majority.  In  exchange  for  the  family  home- 
stead, he  received  of  Judd,  about  the  time  of  his  marriage,  three  acres  at  Stanley's 
Timber,  so  called,  on  the  north  side  of  the  Farmington  road,  half  a  mile  or  more  , 
from  the  meeting-house.  Here  he  built  a  house  and  lived.  The  lot,  with  two 
acres  which  had  been  added  to  it,  was  recorded  in  June,  1703,  as  five  acres,  more 
or  less,  with  a  dwelling-house,  east  on  Ensign  Stanley,  west  on  Abraham  Andruss, 
deed.,  north  and  south  on  highways.  In  June,  1705,  Warner  conveyed  his  house 
and  lot  to  John  Warner,  son  of  Thomas,  receiving  in  exchange  lands  at  Judd's 
Meadow.  Soon  afterwards,  he  removed  into  the  south  part  of  the  town,  settling  on 
or  near  Fulling-Mill  Brook,  sometimes  called  Daniel  Warner's  Brook.  There  he 
is  known  to  have  had  a  house  in  Aug.  1708.  He  was  once  or  twice  fence  viewer, 
but  held  no  important  public  office.  His  first  wife,  Mary  Andruss,  died  April  10, 
1709.  He  d.  Sept.  13,  1713,  being  the  last  victim  of  the  great  sickness  of  that 
and  the  previous  year.  His  widow,  Mary,  who  was  a  daughter  of  Thomas  Richason, 
was  living  in  1730.  His  sons,  Samuel,  Ebenezer  and  Abraham,  settled  at  Judd's 
Meadow. 

THOMAS  WARNER. 

He  was  probably  younger  than  his  brother  John,  Sen.,  of 
Waterbury  and  Daniel  of  Farmington.  He  was  not  a  first 
subscriber,  but  probably  took  his  deceased  father's  propriety 


HISTOKY   OF   WATERBURY.  199 

and  allotments.  He  did  not  take  effectual  measures  to  secure 
his  rights  till  after  the  forfeiture  of  Feb.  1682-3. 

Thomas  "Warner  was  a  subscriber  to  Mr.  Peck's  settlement. 
He  held  some  unimportant  town  offices — was  hajward,  chim- 
ney viewer,  surveyor.  His  house  was  on  the  eastern  side  of 
Bank  street,  where  the  Baptist  Church  now  stands.  The  com- 
mittee voted  in  Nov.  1679,  that  his  "  siller "  [cellar]  might 
stand  "  without  molestation  according  to  an  agreement  made 
with  Left.  Samuel  Steel."  His  lot  contained,  March  21, 1698-9, 
two  acres  and  three  quarters,  and  was  bounded  north  on  John 
Hopkins'  house  lot,  east  (before  the  above  date)  on  John  Rich- 
ards' house  lot,  "  south  on  a  lot  which  formerly  belonged  to 
the  parsonage,"  west  on  highway.  He  convej'ed  the  place,  at 
the  above  date,  to  John  Richards,  and  received  in  exchange 
a  house  and  three  acres  of  land  on  the  southwest  side  of  the 
''  mill  path,"  where  he  afterwards  lived. 

Thomas  Warner  m,  Elizabeth ,  and  d.  Xov.  21,  1714. 

His  son  Benjamin  of  JSTew  Haven,  was  administrator  on  his 
estate.  The  "  heighrs "  made  an  agreement  with  him,  by 
which  he  was  to  take  care  of  the  widow,  "  providing  for  her 
a  comfortable  j)lace  to  live  in,  and  meat,  drink,  lodging,  appa- 
rel, physic  and  nescessaries  suitable,  as  long  as  she  lives."  As 
a  compensation,  they  quit-claimed  to  him,  the  said  Benjamin, 
all  their  interest  in  the  estate  of  the  deceased. 

Children  : 

1.  Elizabeth  ;  m.  Samuel  Cliatterton. 

2.  Benjamin.  The  first  time  his  name  is  met  with  on  the  record  is  in  1698  ? 
He  was  accepted  as  the  owner  of  a  bachelor  right  about  1*700.  His  father  gave 
him  a  part  of  his  home  lot  on  the  mill  path,  July  10,  1*702.  Soon  after,  when  he 
could  do  it  without  jeoparding  his  £40  right,  and  when  true  men  were  most  need- 
ed, he  removed  to  New  Haven.  There  he  had  a  daughter.  Desire,  born  Aug.  23, 
1704,  and  afterwards,  Benjamin  and  Joseph.  He  is  called  Sen.  on  the  list  of  pro- 
prietors, to  distinguish  him  from  Benjamin,  the  sou  of  Ephraim  Warner,  who  is 
termed  Jr. — (The  third  child  born  before  1680  I  have  been  unable  to  find.) 

4.  John  ;  b.  March  6,  1680-81,  in  Waterbury,  as  were  the  subsequent  children. 
He  was  admitted  as  a  £40  proprietor  Dec.  23,  1701,  and  purchased,  June,  1705,  Dan- 
iel Warner's  house  and  lot  of  five  acres  on  the  Farmington  road.  He  was  called 
tailor,  that  being  his  trade,  to  distinguish  him  from  the  other  John  Warners — John 
the  son  of  John  and  John  the  son  of  Ephraim.  Sept.  30,  1713,  he  deeded  the 
land  "with  the  fencing  and  building  and  fruit  trees,"  which  he  bought  of  Daniel 
Warner,  to  Ebeuezer  Bronson  for  £11,  and  the  same  day  left  the  town.  The  lot 
was  afterwards  called,  after  him,   the   "  tailor  lot."     For  some  reason,   he  was 


200  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

cousidered  as  haYiug  forfeited  his  baclielor  lot.     He  appears  to  have  returned  to 
Waterbury  at  a  later  day,  and  to  have  been  an  inhabitant  in  1*734-5. 
6.  Mary  ;  b.  Dec.  9,  1682,  and  d.  June  7,  iVOo. 

6.  Martha ;  b.  April  1,  1684,  and  m.  John  Andruss,  son  of  Abraham,  Sen. 

7.  Thomas  ;  b.  Oct.  28,  1687,  m.  Abagail  Barnes,  and  lived  in  Farmington. 

8.  Samuel ;  b.  "  March  16,  1690  ;"  received  a  bachelor  lot  March  10,  1712,  and 
was  fence  viewer  and  hay  ward  in  1714.  lie  lived  at  Judd's  Meadow,  and  died 
about  1741. 

9.  Margaret;  b.  "March  16,  1693,"  and  m.  Ebenezer  Richason,  son  of  Thomas. 

JOIIX  WELTOK 

Tlie  family  tradition  is  that  he  was  originally  from  Saybrook. 
He  was  an  early,  but  not  a  first  settler  of  Farmington. 
lie  was  one  of  the  eighty-four  proprietors  of  that  town  in 
1672,  and  a  signer  of  the  articles  in  1674.  He  had  fence  in 
all  the  allotments  except  the  iirst,  and  was  probably  in  Matta- 
tuck  as  early  as  1679.  I  do  not  learn  that  he  was  backward 
in  complying  with  the  conditions  to  which  he  had  subscribed. 
Though  not  perhaps  a  leading  man,  he  may  have  been  a  val- 
uable one  notwithstanding.  At  any  rate,  he  did  not  run  away 
when  he  found  that  difficulty  and  danger  were  to  be  en- 
countered. He  was  one  of  the  twenty-five  that  pledged  them- 
selves to  pay  Mr.  Peck's  salary.  At  one  time  (in  1691)  he  got 
upon  the  road  of  military  distinction,  but  some  how  ended 
where  he  began,  with  the  rank  of  corporal.  He  was  select- 
man in  1708,  and  town  constable  for  eight  years  between  1698 
and  1714. 

John  Welton  lived  on  the  south  side  of  TVest  Main  street, 
near  where  Mrs.  Giles  Ives'  house  stands.  His  house  lot  con- 
tained two  acres,  and  was  bounded,  in  1687,  east  on  Thomas 
Judd,  Jr.,  west  on  Abraham  Andruss,  Sen.,*  north  and  south 
on  highway.  In  his  old  age,  by  deed  dated  March  2,  1726, 
he  conveyed  to  bis  eldest  son  John  and  to  John's  youngest  son 
Oliver,  (the  latter  to  be  "  the  proper  heir,"  at  the  decease  of 
his  father,)  liis  house  and  home  lot,  and  his  "  three  acer  lot 
lying  within  the  meadow  fence,"  (next  east  of  the  old  burying 
yard,)  and  another  lot  over  the  river,  on  condition  that  he  the 
said  John  should  take  care  of  the  father  (then  living  with  the 
son)  and  provide  for  him  during  his  natural  life. 

*  A  record,  made  in  June,  1708,  when  there  had  been  changes  of  ownership,  bounds  the  lot 
east  on  Robert  Scott,  and  west  on  Thomas  Judd,  Jr. 


HISTORY   OF   WATEKBURY.  201 

John  Welton's  wife's  name  was  Mary.  Tliey  had  six  child- 
ren before  they  left  Farmington ;  or  at  any  rate,  the  first  one 
horn  in  "Waterbnry  is  called  the  seventh.  He  died  June  IS, 
1726,  and  his  wife,  Mary,  Oct.  18, 1716.  His  son  George  was 
administrator. — Estate  £136,  14s. 

Children : — (I  am  nnahle  to  find  but  five  of  the  six  born  be- 
fore the  father  came  to  Waterbnry.) 

1.  Abigail;  m.  about  1691,  Cornelius  Bronsou  of  Woodbury.  She  was  living 
a  widow  in  1742. 

2.  Mary;  m.  Aug.  17,  1692,  John  Eichards. 

3.  Elizabeth  ;  m.  Thomas  Griffin,  and  d.  about  the  time  of  her  fothcr. 

4.  John;  m.  "March  13,  1706,"  Sarah,  d.  of  Ezekiel  Buck,  Jr.  of  Wethersfield, 
and  d.  April  3,  1738.  His  widow  d.  Sept.  5,  1751.  He  had  a  grant  of  a  house  lot 
from  the  proprietors  as  early  as  Jan.  1692-3,  he  to  build  and  remain  six  years  in 
tlie  town.  He  had  probably  then  just  completed  his  twenty-first  year.  After- 
wards, (in  1707-8,)  he  was  made  a  £40  proprietor.  He  was  a  weaver  by  trade  ; 
surveyor  in  1709  ;  grave  digger  in  1726,  1727  and  1729,  and  wrote  by  proxy.  He 
lived  with  his  father,  and  probably  improved  the  homestead  after  the  death  of  the 
latter. 

5.  Stephen  ;  m.  March  4,  1701-2,  Mary,  d.  of  Joseph  Gaylord,  and  Jan.  28, 
1712-13,  Joanna  Wetmore  of  Simsbury.  He  died  March  13,  1713.  He  was  ad- 
mitted a  bachelor  proprietor  in  due  course,  (March  26,  1699  ;)  was  chimney  view- 
er in  1700,  and  collector  of  town  and  ministerial  rates  several  times.  His  trade 
was  that  of  a  weaver.  In  Sept.  1701,  he  bought  of  Ephraim  Warner  a  house  and 
lot  on  the  corner  of  Grove  and  Willow  streets,  (marked  Francis  H.  Pratt.)  After- 
wards, he  resided  on  the  corner  of  East  and  North  Main  streets,  in  a  house  he 
bought  Feb.  2,  1703-4,  of  his  father  Gaylord. 

7.  Richard;  b.  "March,  1680,"  (reputed  the  first  male  child  of  European  pa- 
rents born  in  Waterbury,)  and  d.  in  1755.  His  wife  was  Mary,  d.  of  Stephen  Up- 
son. He  received  bachelor  accommodations  in  May,  1699  ;  was  (apparently)  a 
builder  by  trade,  a  townsman  in  1723,  and  a  sergeant  of  mihtia.  He  first  bought 
the  house  and  a  lot  of  three  acres  on  the  corner  of  Grove  and  Willow  streets  of 
his  brother  Stephen,  for  which  he  gave  "a  horse  and  a  young  stear  and  a  parcel 
of  timber,"  the  date  of  the  purchase  being  Aug.  1,  1703.  He  afterwards,  in  1711, 
"  in  consideration  of  a  two  year  old  heifer  "  conveyed  the  land  (nothing  is  said  of 
a  house)  to  John  ScoviU.  Before  this,  or  in  1708,  he  bought  the  house  of  Jo- 
seph Gaylord,  Jr.,  on  Buckshill,  to  which  place  he  removed. 

8.  Hannah  ;  b.  April  1,  1683,  and  m.  Thomas  Squire,  Jr.  She  was  living  in 
1742. 

9.  Thomas;  b.  Feb.  4,  1684-5  ;  m.  March  9,  1714,  Hannah,  d.  of  Josiah  Alford, 
and  d.  April  19,  1717.  He  had  two  sons,  both  of  whom  d.  young,  and  his  estate 
was  distributed  in  1730  to  his  brothers  and  sisters.  He  received  a  bachelor  lot  in 
1705-6. 

10.  George  ;  b.  Feb.  3,  1686-7,  m.  Elizabeth ,  and  d.  Jan.  7,  1773.— Estate 

£311,  OS.     When  he  was  sixteen  years  of  age,  his  father  bound  him,  for  two  years, 
to  his  brother  Stephen  to  learn  the  weaver's  trade.   When  the  two  years  were  com- 


202  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

pleted,  Stephen  was  to  give  him  "  a  loom  and  all  things  or  geers  suitable  for  worck- 
ing  one  sort  of  plain  worck."  George  was  the  fifth  of  his  father's  sons  who  re- 
ceived bachelor  privileges,  he  being  accepted  Jan.  I'TOo-G.  When  his  right  was 
secured,  he  removed  to  Stratford,  where  he  was  residing  in  1715.  He  returned 
to  Waterbury  before  Dec.  1721,  and  afterwards  lived  near  Scott's  Mountain, 
(northeastern  part  of  Watertown.) 

11.  Else;  b.  Aug.  1690 :  m. Griffin  and  lived  in  Simsburv  in  1733. 


CHAP  TEE    XII  I. 


ECCLESIASTICAL  AFFAIRS  :     MR.  PECK'S  MINISTRY. 

It  is  well  understood  that  New  England  was  settled  by  Con- 
gregationalists  from  Old  England,  who  desired  to  get  quit  of 
a  church  establishment  which  they  did  not  approve,  and  to 
set  up  religious  worship  and  a  church  government  which 
should  accord  with  their  peculiar  views.  By  settling  in  this 
far  distant  country  they  hoped  to  escape  the  persecutions  which 
non-conformity  had  brought  upon  them  at  home.  They  loved 
civil  liberty,  but  chiefly  as  a  means  of  securing  freedom  for 
themselves  in  the  cliurch.  They  sought  to  establish  a  govern- 
ment and  a  religion  based  on  the  Bible,  and  which  should  be 
administered,  even  in  matters  of  detail,  according  to  the  Di- 
vine will. 

The  colonists  of  Connecticut  took  good  care  to  provide  for 
the  interests  of  religion.  They  were  not  slow  in  granting 
material  aid.  The  committee  for  the  settlement  of  Mattatuck, 
in  accordance  with  a  provision  in  the  original  articles,  reserved 
three  proprieties  of  £150  each,  for  public  and  pious  uses. 
These  were  the  three  "  great  lots  "  mentioned  in  the  early 
records.  It  was  designed  the  minister  should  have  one  of 
them,  "  the  mayger  part  of  the  inhabitants  "  to  determine 
which.  His  was  a  larger  interest  tlian  was  allowed  to  any 
other  individual.     It  was  larger  because  the  minister  was  a 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUKY.  203 

more  dignified  and  important  personage  tliau  any  otlier.  The 
propriety  was  entitled,  from  the  first,  to  all  the  divisions  and 
privileges  of  the  other  proprieties. 

Besides  the  j)rovision  which  has  been  mentioned,  the 
committee,  Nov.  27,  1679, 

Dctermmed  that  the  hous  lott  of  two  acres  lying  att  the  east  end  of  the  town, 
abuttting  northwardly  on  thomas  warners  hous  lott  and  a  peec  of  meadow  and 
swamp  containing  abought  fifteen  Acrs  by  estimation  lying  upon  Steels  brooke 
abutting  vpon  the  north  on  Edman  [Edmund]  Scoote  Jun'  on  Thomas  Judd 
Junor  on  the  east  and  on  a  hill  south  and  west — And  a  peice  of  land:  containing 
by  estimation  thre  acrs  lying  in  the  pasture  land  comanly  so  called:  Shall  be  and 
remain  for  the  occupation  and  improuemcnt  of  the  minister  of  the  s^  towne  for 
euer  without  any  altaration  or  disposall  vse  or  improuemcnt  what  soe  euer. 

The  house  lot  in  the  preceding  extract  was  on  the  east  side 
of  Bank  street,  a  little  south  of  the  present  Baptist  Church.  It 
was  called  the  "parsonage,"  and  was  exchanged,  without  any 
right,  by  the  town,  Dec.  30,  1679,  with  Stephen  Upson,  (it  was 
afterwards  recorded  as  belonging  to  said  Upson,)  for  a  lot  of 
two  acres,  lying  further  to  the  east  and  south,  and  in  the  rear 
of  Upson's  house  lot.  This  rear  lot  was  afterwards  sequestered 
by  special  act  of  the  town,  as  follows : 

April:  10:  1699  y*  town  by  uoat  did  sequester  y'  lot  at  y®  east  end  of  thomas 
worner  Stephen  ubson  and  richard  porters  hous  lots  to  be  and  remain  to  y« 
pasnag. 

The  lot  of  "  three  acres  in  the  pasture  land,"  afterwards 
called  "  the  little  pasture, "  was  the  late  "  parsonage  lot," 
lying  between  Willow  street  and  the  old  "Long  Cove," 
through  which  the  Hartford  and  Fishkill  Eailroad  was  laid  out. 

The  first  settlers  of  Waterbury  were,  in  a  majority  of 
instances,  members  of  Mr.  Samuel  Hooker's  church  and 
society  of  Farmington.  In  removing,  they  deprived  them- 
selves, for  the  most  part,  of  the  ministrations  of  the  Gospel. 
As  they  were  a  "  go-to-meeting  "  people,  they  felt  this  to  be 
a  sore  deprivation.  They  not  only  had  no  regular  preaching, 
but  they  had  nobody  to  officiate  at  the  burial  of  their  dead, 
or  to  perform  the  ceremony  of  baptism.  For  many  3^ears 
they  had  to  go  to  Farmington,  twenty  miles,  to  get  their 
children  baptized.  They  doubtless  had  occasional  preaching. 
As  they  had  a  minister's  house  already  built  at  the  time 
Mr.  Peck  was  invited  to  settle,  they  probably  had  a  minister 


204  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUET. 

residing  with  tliem  a  part  of  the  time.  But  tliey  needed  an 
ordained  pastor  of  their  own,  and  at  the  earliest  moment,  when 
their  circumstances  w^ould  allow  it,  they  took  steps  to  procure 
one.  Thej  gave  a  "  call  "  to  Mr.  Jeremiah  Pock  of  Green- 
wich, as  follows : 

Att  a  meeting  of  the  propriators  of  watterbury  march  the  eighteen:  1G89: 
[1690,  N.  S.]  they  did  mianemussly :  desir:  m^  Jerimy  peeclie  sen''  of  giinage  : 
to  setle  with  them  in  the  worcke  of  the  minestry  :  Att  the  same  meeting  for  the 
incoragmente  of  m'  pecke  aboue  said:  the  propriators  gaue  him  the  houss  built 
for  the  minester  :  with  the  horn  lote  :  att  his  first  entarans  ther :  with  his  famely : 

Att  the  same  meeting  the  aboue  said  propriators  of  waterbury  granted :  m'' 
Jeremy  peek :  of  grinag  :  tlie  other  alotments :  or  seuerall  deuisions :  belonging 
to  the  minesters  lote  so  called :  prouided :  he  cohabit  with  them  four  yeres  : :  and 
if  the  prouidens  of  god:  so  dispos  that  he  shod  dye  befor  the  four  yers  be  out  itt 
shall  fall  to  his  heirs. 

At  the  same  meeting  the  proprietors  Granted  to  Caleb  and  Jeremiah  Peck  the 
tno  House  Lotts  Laid  out  to  the  great  Lotts  one  buting  westerly  on  Abraham 
Andruss  his  home  Lott  the  other  on  ben  Jones  his  home  Lott  and  one  of  the 
Great  Lotts  of  Medow  with  the  Severall  Divisions  of  upland  upon  Condition 
they  build  Each  of  them  A  tenentable  house  that  Is  to  Say  a  house  upon  Each 
home  Lott  and  dwell  with  ym  four  years. 

In  order  to  provide  for  Mr.  Peck's  support,  the  proprietors 
entered  into  the  following  agreement.  It  bears  no  date,  but  is 
recorded  in  connection  with  the  votes  which  gave  the  call,  &c. 
It  was  probably  signed  at  the  same  time,  or  soon  after  the 
votes  were  passed.  There  is  evidence  of  this,  (were  any  needed,) 
to  be  gathered  from  the  names  appended  to  it. 

In  Considaration  of  settling  the  reuai-ant :  M'  Jerimy  pecke  in  the  worcke  of 
*he  menestry :  amongst  vs :  in  watterbury :  we  whos  names :  are  vuder  writen  : 
doe  ingage :  to  pay  to  the  aforsaid  :  m'  Jerimy  pecke  acording  to  our  yerly  gi-and 
leuy  ecth:  of  us:  our  proportions  of  sixty:  pounds  by  the  yere:  to  be  payed  fifty: 
pounds  in  prouition  pay :  and  ten  pounds  in  wood  and  thus  to  doe  yerly 
Robert  porter :  John  brownson  John  newill 

Thomus  Judd  sen  Samuel  hickox  Abraham  andrews  sen 

John  standly  Oljadiah  richards  Daniell  warner: 

John  wilton  sen  pllip  Judd  beniamin  barns 

Edman  scoote  sen  Abram  Andrews  Thomus  richardson 

Isaac  brownson  Thomus  Judd  Ju  Timothy  standly 

Joseph  gayler  Thomus  warner:  John  hopkins  : 

Daniel  porter :  Edman  scoot  Ju  steuen  vpson 

Thomus  newell 

Mr.  Peck  accepted  the  invitation  extended  to  him.  He  j^ro- 
bably  began  to  preach,  regularly,  for  the  AVatevbnry  people, 


HISTOKT   OF   WATERBUKY.  205 

as  early  as  tlie  summer  of  1689,  and  removed  into  the 
town  with  his  family,  in  the  beginning  of  the  foUowing 
year.  But  his  formal  settlement  was  delayed  for  some  time. 
There  Avas  a  law  in  existence,  at  this  date,  which  declared 
"that  no  person,  within  this  colony,  shall  in  any  wise  imbody 
themselves  into  church  estate,  without  consent  of  the  general 
court,  and  approbation  of  neighboring  elders."  In  obedience 
to  this  requirement,  the  following  petition  was  drawn  up  and 
presented ; 

To  the  honored  General  Court  our  humble  salutations  presented :  wishing  all 
happiness  may  attend  ye :  we  at  least  some  of  the  Inhabitants  of  Waterbury 
being  by  the  goodness  of  God,  inclined  and  desirous  to  promoue  [promote]  the 
concerns  of  the  Kingdom  of  Christ  in  this  place  by  coming  into  church  order  :  do 
find :  which  we  well  approue  of:  that  it  hath  been  ordered  by  the  honoured 
General  Court:  that  no  persons  within  this  Colony  shall  in  any  wise  imbody: 
themsclues  into  church  estate  without  the  consent  of  the  General  Court  and  appro- 
bation of  the  neighbour  churches,  wee  humbly  request  the  consent  of  the  honoured 
General  Court  now  assembling  :  that  we  may  as  God  shall  giue  us  Cause  and  asssist- 
ance  proceed  to  the  gathering  of  a  Congregationall  Church  in  this  place,  and  for 
the  approbation  of  neighbour  Churches  we  desire  it  and  intend  to  seek  it.  So 
being  unwilling  too  long  to  prevent  your  Honors  from  other  emei-gent  occasions. 
we  in  brcuity  subscribe  ourselues  in  all  duty  your  humble  Seruants  in  the  name 
and  behalf  of  the  rest  of  our  Brethren. 

Jeremiah  Peck 

From  Waterbury.  91.  May.  1'2.  Isaac  Brounsoan 

The  preceding  document  may  he  found  in  tlie  first  volume 
of  Ecclesiastical  Records,  at  Hartford.  It  is  in  Mr.  Peck's 
hand  writing,  except  the  name  of  Isaac  Bronson.  It  is  written 
in  a  neat,  almost  elegant,  hand.  I  liave  given,  in  another 
place,  fac  similes  of  the  signatures  with  the  date.  Tlie  Court's 
action  on  the  petition  ]nay  be  seen  as  follows: 

May  1091.  Mr.  Peck  and  Isaac  Brunson  in  the  behalfe  of  the  people  of  Water- 
bury petitioning  this  court  [&c.  ] This  Court  doe  freely  Grant  them  their 

request,  and  shall  freely  encourage  them  in  their  beginnings  and  desire  the  Lord 
to  give  them  good  success  therein  they  proceeding  according  to  call  therein. 

It  was  a  practice  among  the  early  Congregationalists  of 
Connecticut,  when  a  church  was  to  be  "  gathered,"  to  select 
from  among  the  brethren  seven  persons  (males)  who  were  term- 
ed the  seven  pillars.  These  chose  their  officers,  including  the 
pastor,  who  was  usually  one  of  their  number.  After  the  church 
was  organized,  other  members  were   admitted   by  v^ote   who 


206  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBTJRY. 

took  part  in  the  proceedings.  Tlie  Waterbnry  chiircli  is  im- 
derstood  to  have  been  formed  after  this  method  with  seven 
male  members,  who  w^ere  the  pillars  ;*  but  Dr.  Trumbull 
states,  in  his  History  of  Connecticut,  that  the  method  in  ques- 
tion was  peculiar  to  the  churches  of  New  Haven,  Milford  and 
Guilford  ;  "  the  churches  in  the  other  towns  being  gathered, 
by  subscribing  similar  confessions  of  faith,  and  covenanting 
together  in  the  same  solemn  manner,  upon  days  of  fasting  and 
prayer.  ]N"eighboring  Elders  and  churches  were  present  on 
those  occasions,  assisted  in  the  public  solemnities,  and  gave 
their  consent." 

At  what  precise  time  the  church  of  Waterbnry  was  organ- 
ized, I  have  been  unable  to  ascertain.  Dr.  Trumbull  says, 
"  August  26th,  1669,"  and  Mr.  Farmer,  in  his  Genealogical 
Eegister,  gives  this  as  the  date  of  Mr.  Peck's  ordination. 
Probably  Mr.  Farmer  copies  from  Trumbull.  I  once  supposed 
that  "  1669  "  was  a  misprint  for  1689,  and  that  the  last  was 
the  true  time  of  Mr.  Peck's  settlement.  Others  have  enter- 
tained a  similar  opinion.  This,  however,  cannot  be  the  proper 
explanation.  Some  of  the  Waterbuiy  people  were  admitted 
members  of  the  Farmington  church  as  late  as  March,  1690-91, 
and  their  children  were  baptized  there  down  to  April,  1691. 
Indeed,  Mr.  Peck  and  "  the  brethren,"  as  we  have  already 
seen,  did  not  get  permission  of  the  General  Court  to  "  embody 
themselves"  till  the  May  Session,  1691.  In  all  probability 
the  installation,  or  ordination,  took  place  soon  after,  possibly 
"  August  26th,"  as  in  Trumbull.  I  say  installation,  or  ordination, 
for  it  is  not  quite  certain  that  Mr.  Peck  had  been  previously 
ordained,  though  he  was  then  nearly  seventy  years  of  age.  It 
has  been  supposed  that  he  was  an  ordained  minister  while  in 
Greenwich,  and  as  strong  circumstantial  evidence  that  he  was 
so,  the  recorded  fact  is  adduced  that  he  was  complained  of 
about  the  time  of  his  removal  to  Waterbnry,  by  some  of  the 
people,  in  a  formal  manner,  because  of  his  "  refusing  to  bap- 
tize their  children."f  If  he  had  no  authority  to  baptize,  no- 
body could  have  complained  of  him  for  refusing,  &c.     And 

*  Manuscripts  of  Bennet  Bronson. 

+  Manuscript  letter  of  Darius  Peck,  Esq.,  Hudson,  N,  T.,  from  whom  I  have  received  interest- 
ing information  concerning  his  ancestor.  I  am  also  Ia,rgely  indebted  to  Mr.  Judd  of  North- 
ampton. 


HISTORY   OF   WATEKBURY.  20T 

yet,  if  he  had  authority,  why  did  he  not  baptize  the  chiklren 
of  Waterbury,  after  he  began  to  preach,  and  before  his  formal 
settlement  ?  "  No  half-way  covenant "  question,  it  is  believed, 
existed  here,  as  there  probably  did  in  Greenwich.  At  any 
rate,  the  children  were  those  of  professors,  and  yet  Avere  car- 
ried to  Farmington  for  baptism. 

Again,  it  appears  from  the  records  of  Greenwich  that  Mr. 
Peck  performed  the  ceremony  of  marriage  there  as  early  as 
IGSl ;  but  the  statute  permitted  no  one  to  do  this  except  magis- 
trates, commissioners,  justices  of  the  peace  and  ordained  min- 
isters. 

Who  the  seven  male  members  were  I  am  unable  to  say  with 
certainty,  except  that  Isaac  Bronson  was  one  of  them.  Mr. 
Peck  himself  may  have  been  another.  There  can  be  but  little 
doubt  that  John  Stanley  and  Thomas  Judd,  Sen.  were  also  of 
the  number.  The  other  church  members  were  Obadiah  Kich- 
ards,  Abraham  Andruss,  (cooper,)  John  Hopkins,  (probably,) 
Joseph  Gaylord,  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  Benjamin  Barnes,  and 
Thomas  Judd,  sou  of  William.  All  these,  except  Mr.  Peck 
and  John  Hopkins,  had  belonged  to  Mr.  Hooker's  church  of 
Farmington,  the  four  last  having  been  admitted  within  two 
years.     There  were  no  other  known  male  members  of  churches. 

Thomas  Judd,  the  son  of  William  Judd,  or  Thomas  Judd 
the  smith,  was  the  first  deacon  of  the  Waterbury  church.  So 
says  his  tomb-stone,  still  standing,  and  there  are  not  sufiicient 
reasons  for  doubting  it.  Still,  there  are  some  circumstances 
which  render  it  improbable  that  he  was  appointed  at  the  or- 
ganization of  the  church,  in  1691.  He  did  not  become  a 
church  member  till  March  22d,  of  that  year,  he  then  being 
under  twenty-nine  years  of  age,  as  shown  by  the  Farmington 
records.  It  is  not  probable  that  a  man  would  have  been  cho- 
sen for  deacon  who  had  been  a-  member  of  the  church  but  a 
few  months,  especially  if  he  was  young  in  years  as  well  as 
religious  experience.  There  were  persons  then  living  who  had 
been  long  members,  who  were  older  and  better  known  than 
Judd,  some  of  whom,  we  may  suppose,  would  have  been  se- 
lected in  preference,  had  a  deacon  been  chosen  as  early  as 
1691.  John  Stanley,  Thomas  Judd,  Sen.,  and  Isaac  Bronson, 
for  aught  that  appears,  were  every  way  qualified  for  a  respon- 


208  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

sible  place  in  tlie  infant  church.     Wliy  some  one  of  them  was 
not  made  a  deacon  at  the  outset,  I  am  unable  to  say. 

Thomas  Jndd,  known  as  the  son  of  William,  or  the  smith, 
was  thus  called  to  distinguish  him  from  his  uncle,  and  his 
cousin  of  the  same  name.  He  is  uniformly  thus  termed, 
whenever  mentioned  in  the  records,  previous  to  1696.  Had 
he  been  deacon  at  an  earlier  date,  he  would  most  certainly, 
unless  from  carelessness,  have  been  so  denominated.  Such  an 
office,  in  those  days,  when  titles  were  not  so  cheap  as  now,  was 
no  slight  aifair  for  a  young  man.  It  could  not  with  decency 
have  been  forgotten  or  overlooked.  For  the  first  time,  Judd 
is  called  deacon,  on  the  town  records,  March  27th,  1696.  This 
title  was  sufllciently  distinctive,  and  afterwards,  for  many 
years,  was  applied  to  him  with  scarcely  an  exception,  save  in 
legal  documents.  At  last,  however,  he  won  a  more  exalted 
honor.  He  became  captain  of  the  train-band,  and  the  eccle- 
siastical was  sunk  in  the  military  title. 

It  appears  quite  probable  then  that  Dea.  Thomas  Judd  was 
not  appointed  to  his  office  in  the  church  till  about  1695,  four 
years  after  Mr.  Peck's  settlement.  "Why  the  church  shonld 
so  long  have  neglected  to  make  this  appointment,  I  am  unable 
to  explain.  Similar  instances  of  delay,  however,  Avere  occa- 
sional, and  may  have  been  common. 

No  sooner  had  Mr.  Peck  been  settled  in  the  ministry,  than 
the  want  of  a  meeting  house  became  painfully  evident.     The  ' 
following  is  a  petition,    copied  from  the  colonial  records,  pre- 
sented to  the  General  Court  for  assistance.     I  am  not  aware 
that  the  petitioners  got  any  help  : 

[May  it]  please  the  honourable  Generall  Assembly  to  take  into  their  serious  con- 
sideration the  Condition  and  Request  of  your  humble  and  louing  seruants  the  in- 
habitants of  Waterbury  as  to  our  Condition  the  prouidence  of  God  and  that  in 
seuerall  ways  hath  brought  us  low  by  losses  of  the  fruits  of  the  earth,  losses  in  our 
liuing  stock  :  but  especially  by  much  sickness  among  us  for  the  space  of  the  last 
four  years:  we  liue  remotely  *  *  *  our  affaires  cost  us  much  Charge,  pains 
and  hardships,  as  to  our  Petition  and  that  which  we  desirest  is  your  encouraging 
and  assisting  of  us  we  hope  in  the  work  :  yet  too  heauy  for  us ;  viz  the  building 
of  an  house  conuenient  for  us  to  assemble  in  for  the  worship  of  God  such  an  house 
we  doe  more  and  more  find  very  great  need  of  [&c.]  much  we  could  mention  by 
way  of  persuasion  :  but  we  are  preuented  of  time  and  we  hope  that  a  few  words 
to  the  wise  will  be  sufficient,  it  may  be  considered  that  we  haue  been  often  at 
Charges  in  sending  forth  horsmen  for  the  timely  discouery  of  an  approaching  cue- 


7in^/^Tr:^< 


m^ 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKT.  209 

mie  which  hath  been  or  might  haue  been  some  safeguard  to  our  neighbours  in 
other  Townes,  for  this  our  Scouting  we  haue  had  publique  recompense,  we  also 
haue  had  farr  more  trouble  than  some  other  Towns  in  the  Colonic  by  the  Souldiers 
passing  to  and  fro  and  their  often  entertainments  with  us  which  hath  occasioned 
much  expense  of  our  time  [&c.]  We  also  are  anformed  that  we  shall  not  be  the 
first  that  haue  publique  assistance  in  the  like  work  in  this  Colonic  we  hope  right 
worthy  Sirs  that  you  that  are  the  Patrons  of  this  Christian  Commonwealth  ;  will 
be  pleased  to  giue  us  further  encouragement  to  build  God's  house — the  encourage- 
ment which  we  doe  particularly  petition  for  is  that  our  Publique  rates  may  be 
giuen  to  us  for  the  space  of  the  four  next  ensuing  years,  we  find  in  holy  Writ 
that  some  whose  spirit  God  hath  Stirred  up  haue  been  famous  in  promoting  such 
a  work:  as  Dauid  and  Solomon,  we  hope  and  trust  we  shall  haue  a  placid  return 
fro~  our  Worthies  upo~  whom  our  eyes  are:  So  we  remain  your  humble  and 
needy  Petitioners  and  Seruants — From  Waterbury  Anno  Domini — 91,  October.  7. 
In  the  name  and  on  the  behalf  of  the  rest  of  our  inhabitants, 

John:  Hopkins  )  m 

ir    , ,    i  Townsmen. 
Thomas  Judd    ) 

Under  the  greatest  discouragements,  the  "Waterbmy  people 
went  on  with  their  enterprise  of  building  a  meeting  house  ; 
but  they  made  slow  progress.  It  was  a  serious  work,  and  they 
were  obliged  to  resort  to  various  expedients. 

May  IT  1694  y^  town  by  uoate  agree  to  use  or  improue  y«  money  y*  now  is  or 
here  after  shall  be  due  for  wild  horses  y'  are  sould  in  y^  town — we  say  to  improue 
it  for  y«  helping  build  y^  meeting  hous  and  to  stand  by  y®  oficers  y'  sell  them  and 
hereafter  to  a  low  thos  y'  bring  in  such  horses  y*  one  half. 

The  wild  horses  referred  to  in  the  preceding  extract  were 
those  that  were  found  running  wild  without  known  owners, 
and  which  were  occasionally  caught  and  brought  in.* 

I  am  unable  to  say  when  the  new  meeting  house  was  finish- 
ed, or  so  far  finished  that  it  could  be  occupied  ;  but  probably 
soon  after  the  date  of  the  town  action  concerning  wild  horses. 
It  stood  on  the  Green  in  front  of  the  house  marked  on  the  map 
William  H.  Scovill,  now  owned  by  Dr.  P.  G.  Eockwell,  near 
the  spot  where  the  two  next  succeeding  Congregational  houses 
were  placed.  It  was  a  small  building  without  glass  or  gallery, 
suited  to  the  humble  circumstances  of  its  projectors.  It  had 
doors  upon  the  east,  west  and  south  sides,  three  in  all. 

Mr.  Peck  was  an  old  man  when  he  became  the  minister  of 


*  The  law  required  that  every  horse  two  years  old  should  be  branded  with  the  town  marlj  by 
the  town  barnder.  The  brand  for  Waterbury  was  R.  Thomas  Judd,  smith,  was  the  first  r«cord- 
ed  town  brander. 

14: 


210  IIISTOKY    OF   AVATEEBURT. 

Waterbniy.  In  a  few  years,  his  health  broke  down,  and  he 
was  unable  to  preach.  He  was  not  well  enough  to  officiate 
in  baptism  as  early  as  June,  1697.  Afterwards  a  minister 
was  hired ;  but  Mr.  Peck  continued  the  pastor  till  his  death, 
June  Tth,  1699,  at  the  age  of  77.  But  few  memorials  remain 
of  him  during  his  residence  in  Waterbury.  Appearances, 
however,  indicate  that  he  was  a  man  of  worth,  and  devoted 
to  his  people.  If  a  minister's  success  is  measured  by  the  ad- 
ditions to  his  church,  his  was  not  great.  There  were  but  few 
accessions  during  his  life,  and  for  several  years  afterwards.  It 
was  a  time  of  embarrassment  and  distress,  as  already  related. 
The  peaceful  virtues  of  religion  are  not  wont  to  prosper  when 
the  state  is  in  jeopardy  and  men  are  suffering  in  their  material 
interests.  As  a  general  rule,  it  is  not  the  tendency,  however 
much  it  should  be,  of  war  and  worldly  calamity,  of  sickness 
and  bodily  suffering,  to  improve  the  heart,  or  mend  the  life. 

Jeremiah  Peck,  according  to  Mather's  Magnalia,  was  grad- 
uated at  Harvard  College,  but  his  name  is  not  upon  the  gen- 
eral catalogue  of  1854.  He  was  in  Guilford,  either  preaching 
or  keeping  school,  in  1656,  (before  which  time,  no  trace  of 
him  has  yet  been  found,)  and  married,  Nov.  12th  of  that  year, 
Johannah,  daughter  of  Mr.  Robert  Kitchell,  a  prominent  citi- 
zen of  Guilford,  (afterwards  of  Newark,  N.  J.)  His  son  Samuel 
was  born  there  Jan,  18th,  1659.  In  Jan.  1660,  he  was  invited 
to  take  charge  of  the  Collegiate  School  at  New  Haven,  his 
father  being  at  the  time  one  of  the  trustees  and  the  business 
agent.  The  following  is  an  extract  from  the  colonial  record 
of  New  Haven  : 

June  26  1G60  It  was  agreed  that  Mr.  Peck  now  at  Guilford  should  be  school- 
master and  that  it  should  begin  in  October  next  when  his  half  year  expires  there  he 
is  to  keep  the  school  to  teach  the  scholars  Latin  Greek  and  Hebrew  and  fit  them 
for  the  College  and  for  the  salary  he  knows  the  allowance  from  the  Colony  is  £40 
a  year. 

This  school  is  now  called  the  Hopkins  Grammar  School,  in 
consequence  of  the  bequest  of  Gov.  Hopkins.  Besides  the 
£40,  Mr.  Peck  had  the  use  of  a  house  and  some  land.  He 
probably  began  to  teach  in  Oct.  1660,  and  continued  until  the 
middle  of  the  next  year.  May  £9th,  1661,  the  colonial  record 
of  New  Haven  says,  "  Mr.  Peck  the  schoolmaster  propounded 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUYY.  211 

IG  questions  about  the  scliool  wliicli  the  Court  answered  and 
Mr.  Peck  seemed  to  be  very  well  pleased," 

In  Sep.  1G61,  Mr.  Peck  was  again  in  Guilford,  and  while 
there,  in  the  fall  of  1661,  received  an  invitation  to  preach  in 
Saybrook.  He  entered  into  an  agreement  with  the  Say  brook 
people,  Sep.  25tli,  1661,  by  which  he  was  to  have  £100  settle- 
ment in  lands  in  fee  and  £55  in  a  house  and  lot,  the  last  to 
revert  to  the  town,  provided  he  removed  within  five  years.  He 
was  also  promised  a  salary  of  £60  per  annum,  two  firkins  of 
butter  to  go  towards  it,  the  rest  to  be  paid  in  corn  and  flesh  at 
current  prices,  his  maintenance  to  be  increased  if  necessary. 

Some  have  supposed  that  Mr.  Peck  must  have  been  ordain- 
ed at  Say  brook.  The  agreement  he  entered  into,  his  £100 
settlement  and  his  building  a  house,  look  like  arrangements 
for  a  permanent  residence,  and  render  the  supposition  plausible. 

After  a  time,  the  Saybrook  people  became  dissatisfied  with 
their  minister,  and  Mr,  Peck  addressed  to  them  the  following 
communication : 

Anno  Domini  63  feb.  2 
Respected  and  loving  ifriends  the  Inliabitants  and  planters  of  Seabroke  I  under- 
stand and  that  from  divers  [sources]  that  there  is  much  Dissatisfaction  with 
Reference  to  myselfe  in  respect  of  my  proceding  in  the  Ministry  at  least  to  a  set- 
tlement and  that  there  are  desires  in  many  to  provide  themselves  with  a  more 
able  Help:  I  do  freely  leave  myself  to  the  providence  of  God  and  the  Thots  of  his 
people:  and  so  far  as  I  am  any  wayes  concerned  herein  I  doe  leave  the  Towne 
wholly  to  their  own  Liberty  to  provide  for  themselves  as  God  shall  direct :  and 
with  respect  to  laying  aside  the  future  Term  of  years  expressed  in  the  Covenant 
as  also  of  laying  me  aside  from  an  Employment  of  so  great  a  concernment  I  do 
desire  that  these  Things  may  be  duly  considered  and  dealt  tenderly  in  that  I  may 
not  be  rendered  useless  in  further  service  for  God :  altho  I  am  unworthy  to  be  im- 
proved so  I  am  yours  in  what  I  may  as  God  shall  please  to  direct  and  enable. 

Jkremiah  Peck.* 

The  controversy  with  Mr.  Peck  was  settled  Jan.  30th,  1665, 
(1665-6,)  the  town  confirming  and  "  giving  him  full  possession 
of  his  accomodation."  He  appears  to  have  left  soon  after,  the 
town  purchasing  the  house  which  he  had  built,  for  his  suc- 
cessor, Mr.  Buckingham. 

In  1661,  Mr,  Peck  was  concerned  with  others  in  the  pur- 
chase of  the  Indians  of  a  large  tract  of  laud  between  the  Rari- 
tan  and  Passaic  rivers  in  'New  Jersey,  on  a  part  of  which  the 

*  stiles'  Itinerary,  Vol.  Ill,  p.  122,  Yale  College  Library. 


212  HISTORY   OF   WATERBUET. 

city  of  Elizabetlitown  now  stands.  In  tlie  next  year,  1665,  the 
union  of  the  Connecticut  and  ISTew  Haven  colonies  took 
place.  Mr.  Peck  was  one  of  those  who  perseveringly  opj^osed 
the  union.  A  party  of  dissatisfied  persons,  chiefly  from  Bran- 
ford,  Guilford  and  Milford,  headed  by  Mr.  Pearson,  determin- 
ed to  remove.  A  committee  was  sent  out  to  view  lands  on 
the  Passaic,  who  made  a  purchase  at  ISTewark.  A  plantation 
covenant  was  entered  into  by  the  intended  emigrants,  which 
was  "  subscribed  from  time  to  time,  until  the  removal,  which 
happened  June  24,  1667."  The  name  of  Pev.  Jeremiah  Peck, 
of  Guilford,  stands  fourth  on  the  list  of  subscribers. 

Mr.  Peck  removed  to  l^ewark  in  1666  or  early  in  1667.  He 
does  not  appear  to  have  ofliciated  regularly  as  a  minister  at 
Newark,  or  anywhere  in  New  Jersey.  In  1672,  he  and  others 
purchased  of  the  Indians  a  tract  of  land,  now  the  western  part 
of  the  town  of  Greenwich,  over  the  people  of  which  town  he 
was  invited  to  settle  as  a  minister.  He  declined  the  call,  but 
in  1678,  it  was  renewed,  and  he  accepted.  In  the  same  year, 
he  removed  to  Greenwich. 

In  consequence  of  Mr.  Peck's  poor  health,  the  Waterbury  peo- 
ple obtained,  in  1698,  the  assistance  of  Kev.  John  Jones.  He 
preached  seven  sabbaths,  and  for  this  service  the  town  voted 
Nov.  14th,  1702,  that  he  should  have  six  pounds,  to  be  raised 
by  tax.  From  this  delay  of  payment,  we  may  infer  that  our 
ancestors,  whatever  other  virtues  they  may  have  had,  were  not 
prompt  in  discharging  debts. 

After  Mr.  Jones  left,  Eev.  John  Eeed  preached,  for  a  time. 
His  performances  pleased  the  people,  and  as  Mr.  Peck  was 
not  expected  to  recover,  an  invitation  was  given  him  to  settle, 
as  appears  from  the  following  town  vote  : 

Febeurary  :  8:  1698-9  the  town  hauing  by  a  comity  giuen  Mr.  John  Reed  a  Call 
to  y«  worck  of  y«  mhiistrey  amongst  us  acsept  what  they  haue  don  in  it  and  do  now 
renew  our  call  to  him  in  order  to  y*  worck  of  ye  ministrey  a  mongst  us 

Att  ye  same  meeting  the  town  granted  to  y«  ministrey  a  salary  of  50P  by  y« 
yeir  prouition  pay  and  lOP  in  wood  and  y^  use  of  y*  pasnage  lands  y^  town  for  y« 
incuragement  of  Mr  iohn  Reed  if  he  acsept  promis  to  giue  him  20P  ayeir  for  too 
yeirs  to  be  payd  in  labor  and  1ft  Judd  deac  Judd  Ens  Standly  and  srg  brunson 
was  chosen  to  present  our  proposals  to  &^  Mr.  Reed  and  treat  him  consrning  y« 
same 

Att  y«  same  meeting  y«  town  granted  to  y^  minister  y'  should  settell  and  be  an 
ordained  officer  in  y*   church  after  he  has   bin    ordained    too  yeirs  y®  whole 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBUKY.  213 

of  y*  great  lot  with  y«  proprieti  to  be  his  own  and  to  build  him  a  hous 
36  or  38  foots  long  and  19  foot  wide  [;]  build  two  chimbleys  from  y^  ground  a 
chamber  chimbley  [;]  make  or  dig  and  ston  a  sellar  clabbord  y®  hous  and  shingcl 
it  [;]  make  one  end  of  y«  hous  fit  to  liue  in  [;]  which  hous  is  to  be  y«  ministers 
on  y«  same  conditions  y^  land  is 

On  the  loth  of  May,  1699,  the  town  voted  to  give  five  acres 
of  upland  to  the  minister  that  should  settle,  and  July  10th, 
following,  renewed  the  call  which  had  been  given  to  Mr. 
Reed.  At  length,  Mr.  R.  declined  the  invitation,  thinking, 
probably,  that  he  could  "  do  more  good "  somewhere  else. 
But  the  people  persevered,  Mr.  Peck  being  now  dead. 

Att  a  town  meeting  august:  21:  1699  deac  Thomas  Judd  was  chosen  a  commity 
to  indeviour  by  himself  and  y®  best  counsell  he  can  take  to  get  one  to  help  us  in 
y«  worck  of  y«  ministry  and  to  bring  a  man  amongst  us  upon  probation  in  order 
to  settellment  if  he  can 

Sep:  12"^:  1699  John  hopkins  was  chosen  a  comity  with  ye  Deac  for  geting  a 
minister 

In  the  mean  time,  the  people  went  on  with  their  enterprise 
of  building  a  house  for  "  y^  minister  yt  should  settell." 
The  old  one  had  been  given  to  Mr.  Peck,  and  a  new  clergy- 
man would  want  suitable  shelter.  A  committee,  consisting  of 
Deac.  Judd,  John  Hopkins  and  Benjamin  Barnes  had  already 
been  appointed  to  superintend  the  work.  The  extracts  below 
refer  to  this  enterprise : 

March  lOd:  1699  [1698-9]  y^  town  granted  a  Rate  of  &^  on  ye  pound  for  Carry- 
ing on  y«  work  of  y^  ministers  hous  to  be  Raysd  on  y^  present  leauey  acsepted. 
or  proued  at  y®  last  October  coui't  in:  98:  each  man  to  do  his  proportion  in  worck  and 
he  y'  fayls  haueiug  his  worck  appoynted  or  called  to  worck  by  y^  commity  shall 
pay  in  prouition  pay  or  y'  which  is  equeuilent 

lun:  20d:  1699:  the  town  mad  choys  deac  thomas  Judd  to  procure  nay  Is  for  y^ 
clabord  and  shingling  y^  ministers  hous  and  y*  town  ingag  to  pay  for  them  in 
money  or  y'  which  is  equiuelent  where  he  byes  them 

Att  y®  same  meeting  deac  Judd  John  Hopkins  and  benjamin  barns  was  chosen 
a  comity  for  y^  carrying  on  y^  worck  of  y«  ministers  hous  to  y**  perfeting  y^  worck 
y«  town  has  promised  to  do  to  it 

October:  12d:  1698:  y«  town  granted  a  Rate  of  a  halfpeney  on  y^  pound  to  be 
Rayed  on  y*  new  leuey  which  rate  is  to  be  payd  in  currant  siluer  money  or  y* 
which  is  equiuilent  barcing  its  own  charg  to  y®  mcrkit  for  to  bye  uayls  and  glass 
for  y®  ministers  hous* 


*  I  find  at  the  beginning  of  the  first  book  of  town  meetings  what  appear  to  be  copies  of  sub- 
scription papers  to  furnish  in  part  the  means  to  pay  for  the  work  and  materials  for  the  minis- 
ter's house.  They  bear  no  diite,  but  they  doubtless  belong  to  the  time  of  which  I  am  writing, 
(1699.)     John  Bronson,  Joseph  Hickox,  Samuel  Hickox  and  John  Scovill,  subscribers,  must  have 


214:  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBUEY. 

At  first  it  was  proposed  to  place  the  new  minister's  house  on 
the  house  lot  which  had  belonged  to  John  Carringtou,  deceas- 
ed, now  owned  by  Green  Kendrick,  and  to  exchange  for  it  the 
lot  in  the  rear  of  Stephen  Upson's  house  lot.  Afterwards,, 
however,  it  was  decided  to  set  it  on  the  "  great  lot,"  so  called, 
which  is  now  the  corner  of  West  Main  and  Willow  street  s 
owned  and  occupied  by  Mrs.  Ambrose  Ives.  The  following- 
vote,  relating  to  this  subject,  was  passed  April  10th,  1699  : 

[The  town  agreed  to]  take  of  [off]  y«  obligation  y'  was  layed  on  y'  hous  lot 
at  y^  west  end  of  y®  town  lying  by  Eobard  Scotts  hous  lot  and  giue  y®  sd  lot  to 
ye  minister  alotment  and  set  y^  minister  on  it. 

I  know  not  what  the  obligation  was  which  is  referred  to  in 
this  vote,  unless  the  lot  spoken  of  had  previously  belonged  to 
the  school  propriety. 


been  the  sons  of  the  original  proprietors  of  the  same  name.  Possibly  the  subscriptions  for  glass 
and  nails  may  have  been  rendered  unnecessary  and  void  by  the  half  penny  tax.  The  names  on 
it  are  not  crossed,  though  those  on  the  other  are,  (with  the  exception  of  Obadiah  Richards  and 
Israel  Richason,)  the  cross  indicating  payment. 

Wheat  for  ye  mason  to  pay  after  harvest 

Samll  Standly  half  a  bushill  wheat  thomas  hilicox  half  a  bushill 

Serg  brunson  half  a  bushill  isriel  richason  half  a  bushill 

isriel  richason  one  peck  Joseph  gaylord  jur  half  a  bushill 

deac  judd  one  bushill  obadiah  riehards  half  a  bushill 

John  scouell  half  a  bushill  wm  hilicoxhalf  a  bushill 

l>en  barnes  half  a  bushill  benjamin  worner  half  a  bushill 

Ensign  Standly  half  a  bushill  John  welton  half  a  bushill  [altered  to  one 

tho  Warner  half  a  bushill  bushell] 

John  welton  half  a  bushill  setphen  ubson  half  a  bushell  [altered  to  one 

sam.  hilicox  half  a  bushill  bushell] 

Joseph  hiiccox  half  a  bushill 

Wheat  for  nayles  and  glass  to   finish  ye  ministers  hous 

John  Richards  one  bushill  John  brunson  half  a  buss 

obadiah  riehards  half  a  bus  John  hopkins  half  a  bush 

ensign  Standly  half  a  bus  Jeremiah  peck 

Left  judd  half  a  buss  John  Scouell  half  a  bushill 
serg  brunson  half  a  busshill 


HISTOKY    OF   WATBEBURY.  215 


CHAPTEE    XI Y 


ECCLESIASTICAL  AFFAIRS:    MR.  SOUTHMAYD'S  MINISTRY. 

The  committee  chosen  to  procure  a  minister,  after  Mr. 
Reed  left,  were  successful.  They  obtained  Mr.  John  South- 
mayd  of  Middletown.  As  early  as  IS^ovember  2d,  1699,  he 
had  satisfied  the  people  of  Waterbury  that  he  was  the  man 
for  them.  He  was  not  yet  prepared  for  a  settlement,  but  he 
continued  to  preach.  He  received  several  invitations  before 
he  yielded  to  the  solicitations  of  the  people.  The  progress  of 
tlie  negotiations  is  explained  by  the  extracts  below.  Tlie  pro- 
vision made  for  his  support  may  also  be  seen : 

Nouembr:  2d:  1699:  y«  town  mad  choyc  of  Left  thoma.s  Judd  Ensign  timo. 
Standly  dcac  thoraas  Judd  srg  Isaac  brunson  John  hopkins  a  commity  to  treat 
[with]  mr.  John  southmeat  furder  in  order  to  y'  worck  of  y^  ministrey  a  mongst  us 
and  for  his  incuragement  in  order  to  his  settellment  amongst  us  in  y«  worck  of  y® 
ministrey  to  ofer  him  what  y«  town  haue  granted  to  y«  ministrey 

Att  y«  same  meeting  y«  town  granted  to  y«  ministrey  40  pounds  in  hibour  with 
what  is  dun  al  ready  for  fencing  and  cleareing  y«  hous  lot  and  other  lands  for  y« 
aduantag  of  y*  minister  y'  shal  settell  amongst  us 

December:  18d:  1699  y®  Town  granted  to  mr.  John  southmeat  for  his  worck  in 
y®  ministrey  amongst  us  for  what  we  haue  had  and  if  he  continue  amongst  us  till 
y«  first  of  march  next  a  rate  of  too  penc  on  ye  pound  according  to  our  gran  leuey 
and  grain  to  pay  to  him  wheat  at  5s  pr  booshill  Ry  at  3s  Indian  corn  2s  6d  poorck 
3d  pr  pound  beeff  at  2d  4  pr  pound  all  to  be  good  and  merchantable 

lun:  24d:  1700  Wheras  y*  town  hauing  had  sum  taste  of  mr.  southmeets  minis- 
trey declare  themselves  satisfied  and  are  willing  to  acsept  him  as  theyr  minister  to 
despenc  y*  word  of  god  amongst  them  and  desire  y'  y^  church  in  due  season 
should  settell  him  in  gosple  order  amongst  them 

Spt:  23:  lYOl  samll  hikcox  and  willyam  hikcox  was  chosen  a  commity  for  to 
gather  y«  20P  granted  to  y®  ministrey  in  worck  out  of  which  by  y«  town  order 
they  are  to  macke  a  well  for  mr.  southmaid  and  any  Refuseing  to  do  his  propor- 
tion when  cal  there  to  by  this  act  ye  town  impour  y^  commity  to  distrain  y^  es- 
tate of  such  persons  for  ye  payment  of  his  just  due  they  glueing  men  seasonable 
worning 

Syt  y^:  15: — ITOS  y^  town  granted  mr.  Southmaid  his  hous  and  lands  and  pro- 
priaty  in  lands  to  be  his  own  when  he  is  an  ordained  officer  in  y^  church  here 
onely  on  these  conditions  y*  if  he  leafe  y^  town  before  ye  too  jelis  are  out  after 


216  HISTOEY   OF   WATERBUKY. 

his  ordination  then  to  return  to  y«  town  again  but  if  he  dy  here  in  y^  time  to  be 
his  heirs. 

Octobr  ye  I"":  1703  Serg  Izaac  brunson  thomas  Judd  iun"'  and  Edman  Scott 
was  chosen  to  prouide  what  was  needful  for  ye  entertaining  ye  elders  and  mesen" 
gers  for  ye  ordaining  Mr  Southmaid  [  *  *  ]  they  [to]  keep  a  fayr  account  of  it 
and  giue  it  to  ye  townsmen  that  it  may  be  payd  in  ye  town  Ratt 

Early  in  1704,  there  was  unmistakable  evidence  that  Mr. 
Soathmayd  was  about  to  yield  to  the  importunities  of  his  peo- 
ple and  consent  to  be  ordained.  Five  pounds  had  been 
granted  him  "  in  speci,"  in  addition  to  the  salary  which  had 
been  offered  him ;  but  now  it  was  ordered  that  the  vote 
which  gave  the  five  pounds  addition  should  "  be  canseled,"  (a 
vote  was  canceled  by  crossing  it  with  a  pen,)  and,  at  Mr. 
Southmayd^s  suggestion,  that  ten  pounds  should  be  given  him 
in  labor,  "  to  be  payd  according  to  men's  gran  leauey  annual- 
ly." Benjamin  Barnes,  Sen,,  and  Stephen  Upson,  Sen.,  were 
added  to  the  committee  for  "treating  with  mr.  southmaid." 

March:  19"" — 1704  ye  town  desired  their  coramity  chosen  to  treat  mr.  south- 
maid for  a  settellment  amongst  us  in  ghosple  order  to  proceed  to  obtaine  an  ordi- 
nation of  mr.  southmaid  as  soon  as  may  be  with  conueniencie 

Mr.  Southmayd  was  at  last  settled  over  a  church  of  twelve 
male  members  and  the  people  of  the  town.  Dr.  Trumbull 
gives,  as  the  date  of  his  ordination.  May  i2th,  1T05,  which  is 
presumed  to  be  correct.  Why  the  ceremony  was  delayed  so 
long  may  be  perhaps  conjectured.  The  truth  is,  "Waterbur^^, 
at  that  time,  was  not  a  very  inviting  field  of  labor.  The  peo- 
ple were  few  in  number  and  poor.  Some  of  their  best  men  had 
died.  Others  had  run  away.  They  had  not  yet  recovered 
from  the  efiects  of  the  great  flood.  They  were  upon  the  bor- 
ders of  civilization  and  in  the  midst  of  an  Indian  war.  A 
gloom  had  settled  over  the  prospects  of  the  town.  No  wonder 
a  young  minister  should  hesitate  and  procrastinate.  Besides, 
pastors,  in  those  days,  were  "settled  for  life,"  or  something  ap- 
proaching it.  They  were  not  permitted  to  indulge  in  roving 
habits,  or  to  seek  frequently  other  and  "  wider "  (more  con- 
spicuous ?)  fields  of  labor.  They  did  not  consider  themselves 
at  liberty  to  leave  their  flocks  except  for  weighty  reasons. 

Mr.  Southmayd  was  settled  on  a  salary  of  £50  in  provision 
and  £10  in  labor,  the  same  which  was  paid  Mr.  Peck  and  offered 


HISTOKY   OF   WATEEBUKY.  217 

to  Mr.  Reed,  except  tlie  first  ministers  were  to  liave  wood  in- 
stead of  labor.  This  may  seem  bnt  a  small  salary,  in  the  eyes 
of  the  present  generation  ;  but  the  truth  is,  in  consideration  of 
the  times  and  the  circumstances,  it  was  a  large  sum.  Few  peo- 
ple can  boast  of  having  made  greater  sacrifices  for  the  support 
of  a  regular  ministry  than  the  early  inhabitants  of  Waterbury. 
In  the  midst  of  their  calamities,  numbering  only  about  thirty 
families,  they  settled  Mr.  Peck,  gave  him  a  house,  provided 
for  his  support,  erected  a  meeting-house  and  a  second  dwell- 
ing-house for  his  successor,  made  provision  for  Mr.  South- 
mayd's  maintenance,  gave  hitn  £40  in  labor  to  fence  and  clear 
his  home  lot,  &c.,  and  a  £20  "  ratt  in  worck,"  besides  con- 
tributing many  "  extras "  not  easy  to  enumerate,  all  in  the 
space  of  a  few  years  ;  while,  at  the  same  time,  extraordinary 
expenses  were  incurred  for  building  forts,  maintaining  scouts 
and  looking  after  the  enemy.  I  doubt  if  the  people  of  the 
present  day  would  as  patiently  submit  to  equal  privations  to 
secure  the  benefits  of  religious  teaching. 

A  modification  was  made,  by  the  agreement  of  the  parties, 
in  Mr.  Southmayd's  salary,  Dec.  14,  1710,  and  the  prices 
which  provisions  were  to  bear  were  fixed,  as  appears  by  the 
following  town  action  : 

The  town  ablig  themselus  to  pay  mr.  southmaid  ten  pound  in  wood  at  8s  per 
cord  and  fiftey  pounds  in  prouison  pay:  :  uis  [viz]  whet  fine  shilings  pr  busel  ry  at 
3s  per  busel  iudian  corn  at  two  shilings  six  pens  per  besel:  porke  at  three  pens  per 
pound  all  to  be  good  and  marchantabul:  befe  and  flaxe  and  other  pay  to  be  at  a 
prise  as  mr  southmaid  and  the  party  consarnd  shal  agre:  :  also  mr  southmad  shal 
not  be  abligd  to  take  aboue  one  thurd  part  of  his  rat  in  Indian  corn  and  if  any 
man  se  cans  to  pay  any  part  of  [the]  rat  in  mony  it  shal  be  acsepted  at  two  thirds: 

Ech  man  is  hereby  obliged  to  pay  his  rat  yerly  by  the  furst  of  febrywary 

[Same  date]  that  artical  too  thurds  in  mony  to  be  of  no  fors:  but  other  ways  as 
the  party  consard  and  mr  southmayd  shal  agre 

Jan.  9,  1718-19  it  was  agreed  that  the  ministery  rate  shall  be  sixty  pound  in 
mony  for  the  yeare  ITIS  and  if  any  pay  in  prouison  it  shall  be  exsepted  at  follow- 
ing prises  wheat  at  six  shillings  ry  at  foure  shillings  ingun  corn  at  three  shiUings 
and  sixpence  a  bushull  to  be  marchantabul  pork  at  3  pence  a  pound  flax  at  eaight 
pence  a  pound 

In  1720,  the  minister  was  to  have  "  £G0  as  money,"  wheat 
at  OS.,  rye  at  3s.,  corn  at  2s.  6d.,  and  ten  pounds  in  wood,  at 
half  a  crown  a  load  for  oak  and  three  shillings  for  walnut. 
"  Said  sixty  pound  shall  be  paid  or  they  [the  town]  will  do 


218  IIISTOKT    OF   WATEEBURY. 

tlieire  endeauer  tliat  it  shall  be  paid  bj  march  next  insuing 
the  date  heare  of." 

Mr.  Southmayd's  salary,  in  1729,  was  raised  to  "  seventy 
five  pounds  in  money,"  one  seventh  or  eighth  part  of  it,  if  de- 
livered by  the  middle  of  Jannary,  to  be  received  in  wood,  at 
such  price  as  the  parties  might  agree  on.  In  1730,  it  was 
raised  to  "  the  just  sum  of  one  hundred  pounds  in  current 
money  of  ISTew  England,"*  In  1733,  the  town,  after  having 
at  first  refused  to  pay  more  than  £80,  agreed  to  give  £90 
money,  wheat  at  8s.,  rye  at  5s.  6d.,  Indian  corn  at  4s.,  pork  at 
6d.  per  pound  for  that  weighing  two  hundred  pounds  and  forty- 
seven  shillings  per  hundred  for  that  weighing  less.  During  the 
remainder  of  Mr.  Southmayd's  ministry,  the  salary  varied  from 
ninety  to  one  hundred  pounds. 

In  1738,  in  consequence  of  declining  health,  Mr.  Southmayd 
asked  for  a  dismission  from  his  peo]3le.  The  following  com- 
munication, expressing  his  desires,  was  laid  before  the  town  in 
town  meeting: 

To  the  Deacons  and  Townsmen  In  Waterbury  to  communicate  to  the  Church 
and  Inhabitants  of  sd  Town. 

Beloved  Brethren  and  Neighbors  I  the  Subscriber  being  under  great  Difficulty 
and  Infirmity  of  Body  and  it  being  such  as  I  fear  Will  never  wear  ofi",  but  In- 
crease and  Grow  upon  me,  makes  my  Care  and  Concern  very  Burthensome  and 
Distressing  So  that  the  publicke  work  I  am  engaged  In  Is  too  much  for  me  and 
having  served  you  under  very  great  difficulty  now  almost  two  years  and  being 
Quite  descouraged  as  to  getting  well  and  finding  that  a  sedentary  life  is  very  De-' 
structive  to  my  health  and  being  very  far  advanced  in  years  and  wilhng  and 
desirous  to  Retire  from  my  Pubhck  work  In  the  ministry  In  which  I  have  been 
with  you  About  38  years  to  the  best  of  my  AbiUty  and  am  now  Desirous  to 
Live  more  privately,  I  take  this  opportunity  for  these  reasons  and  many  more 
which  might  be  mentioned  to  signify  to  you  that  I  am  willing  and  heartily  De. 
sirous  that  you  would  get  some  person  can  affect  and  pitch  upon  to  come  among 
you  to  preach  the  Gospel  here  and  to  Be  with  you  in  order  to  a  Settlement  as 
soon  as  conveniently  may  be  In  the  work  of  the  ministry  and  I  desire  you  would 
be  as  Speedy  In  the  thing  as  may  be  for  I  think  I  cannot  serve  you  any  Longer, 
which  Request  I  hope  you  will  be  most  Ready  and  forward  to  comply  with  and 
oblige  your  friend  and  Distressed  minister,  who  Sincerely  Desires  your  welfare 
and  prosperity  both  Spiritual  and  temporal  and  his  own  ease  and  freedome.  ' 
Desiring  the  continuance  of  your  prayers  for  me  I  subscribe  my  Self  your  well 
wisher  John  Southmayd. 

*  la  1731,  Mr.  Southmayd  gave  a  writing,  dated  Dec.  26th,  which  is  recorded,  by  which,  in 
view  of  the  burdens  of  the  town,  he  agreed  to  "  acquit  and  discharge  the  town  from  all  the  rates 
that  were  granted,  due,  owing  and  payable  to  [him  for  his]  labour  among  them  from  the  year 
1099  to  the  year  1723,"  inclusive. 


HISTOKY   OF   WATEEBUEY,  219 

In  replj,  tlie  town  voted  to  call  another  minister,  but  ex- 
pressed a  wish  that  Mr.  Southmayd  might  continue  to  officiate 
"  as  far  as  he  should  be  able."  At  the  same  time,  a  commit- 
tee was  appointed,  consisting  of  Mr.  Isaac  Bronson,  Dea.  Joseph 
Lewis  and  Thomas  Clark,  "  to  call  a  minister  to  preach  the 
Gospel  in  order  to  a  settlement."  In  this  proceeding,  however, 
they  were  required  to  "  take  the  advice  of  the  Eev.  Mr.  South- 
mayd and  neighboring  elders  of  the  County,  and  proceed  ac- 
cordingly." On  the  fourth  of  September  following,  they  were 
instructed  "to  apply  themselves  to  the  Heverend  Mr.  Saml. 
"Whittlesey,  Mr.  Joseph  ISToyes,  Mr.  Samuel  Hall  and  Mr.  Isaac 
Stiles  for  direction  as  to  a  suitable  person  to  be  applied  to." 

There  are  no  facts  to  show  at  what  time  Mr.  Southmayd's 
official  connection  with  the  town  was  dissolved ;  but  it  ap- 
pears to  have  been  soon  after  his  communication  requesting 
a  dismission,  and  before  Sept.  4,  1738.  He  had  an  unset- 
tled claim  against  the  town.  Some  question  regarding  this 
was  submitted  to  "  the  Association  convened  at  Meriden  in 
"Wallingford  in  May,"  (1738.)  In  pursuance  of  a  recommen- 
dation by  this  body,  Mr.  Southmayd  made  a  proposal  (Sept.  4, 
1738)  for  a  settlement  of  his  claim.  He  proposed  that  the 
town  should  pay  him  one  hundred  pounds  in  money  on  or  be- 
fore the  first  of  March,  1740,  "  separate  from  any  other  grant 
already  made,"  and  that  he  should  have  the  use  of  the  little 
pasture  during  his  life.  If  this  offer  was  rejected,  he  express- 
ed a  willingness  to  submit  the  question  "  to  some  indifferent 
persons  to  say  what  is  just  and  reasonable  to  be  done,  [&c.]  and 
abide  by  their  judgment." 

The  town  decided,  "  by  a  full  vote,"  to  pay  the  one  hun- 
dred pounds.  Before,  however,  the  money  became  due,  or  in 
January,  1740,  certain  persons,  "  calling  themselves  church- 
men," remonstrated  against  paying  it.  This  remonstrance  was 
signed  by  fifteen  individuals. 

Thus  was  commenced,  in  an  open  form,  a  controversy  be- 
tween the  friends  of  Congregationalism  and  Episcopacy  in 
Waterbury,  and  which  ended,  ere  long,  in  confusion  and  dis- 
memberment. So  determined  was  the  opposition  to  the  one 
hundred  pound  vote  that  Mr.  Southmayd  did  not  insist  on  his 


220  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBCRY, 

legal  rights,  and.  the  money  was  never  paid.     He,  however, 
retained  the  use  of  the  "little  pasture." 

Rev.  John  Southmayd  graduated  at  Harvard  College  in 
1697.  Little  is  known  of  him  before  he  came  to  "Waterhury. 
There  is  an  anecdote,  however,  of  his  college  life,  which  used 
to  be  related  by  the  late  Professor  Hedge  of  Harvard.  It  runs 
thus : — Southmayd  prepared  a  chair  which  was  so  constructed 
that  when  an  unsuspecting  person  sat  down  in  it,  it  suddenly 
gave  way.  When  the  Freshman  class  was  entered,  he  would 
invite  them,  one  at  a  time,  to  his  room,  (where  his  fellows  had 
gathered,)  and  offer  them  the  treacherous  chair.  All  but  the 
discomfited  freshmen  of  course  enjoyed  the  laugh.  In  the 
same  class  with  Southmayd  there  was  one  by  the  name  of 
Reed  who  was  mischievous,  and  one  Collins  who  was  dissolute. 
A  wag,  to  hit  off  the  three,  composed  some  lines  which  ran 
thus : — 

Bless'd  is  the  man  who  hath  not  lent 

To  wicked  Reed  his  ear, 
Nor  spent  his  life  as  Collins  hath, 

Nor  sat  in  Southmayd's  chair.* 

Mr.  Southmayd  was  chosen  town  and  proprietors'  clerk  in 
Dec.  1721,  and  was  continued  in  the  office  till  his  death,  thirty- 
five  years.  He  wrote  a  round,  plain,  and  in  earlier  life,  an  ele- 
gant hand,  contrasting  pleasantly  with  the  execrable  chirogra- 
phy  of  some  of  his  predecessors.  Its  jet-black  characters  still 
look  fresh.  All  who  have  occasion  to  consult  the  records,  must 
have  their  hearts  drawn  out  in  affection  for  the  accomplished 
clerk. 

Soon  after  Mr.  Southmayd's  dismission  from  his  pastoral 
charge,  or  in  1741,  he  was  appointed  a  justice  of  the  peace.  He 
was  again  aj^pointed  in  1747,  and  held  the  office  till  his  death. 
He  was  a  justice  of  the  quorum  from  1742  to  1746  inclusive, 
and  a  deputy  to  the  General  Court  from  1740  to  1744  inclu- 
sive, and  again  in  1754.  He  was  much  respected,  and  occu- 
pied a  large  space  in  the  history  of  the  town  of  his  adoption. 
Intelligent  and  judicious,  his  fellow  townsmen  honored  him 
and  deferred  to  him.     They  gave  him  many  testimonials  (such 

*  Manuscript  letter  from  Rev.  Daniel  S.  Southmayd,  Concord,  N.  H.  1S29. 


HISTORY   OF    WATEEBURY.  221 

as  they  had  to  bestow)  of  their  confidence  and  esteem.  His 
honorable  decent,  at  a  time  when  family  was  of  more  acconnt 
than  at  present,  assisted  to  give  him  character.  He  was  one 
of  the  largest  landholders  of  the  town,  having  become  so  by 
purchase  as  well  as  by  division.  His  patrimonial  estate  was 
large.  As  an  evidence  of  his  extraordinary  wealth,  it  is  stated 
that  he  brought  from  Middletown,  after  his  father's  death,  fifty 
pounds  in  gold  and  silver — a  sum  which,  had  it  been  laid  out 
in  the  purchase  of  the  best  lands  of  the  plantation,  at  the  low 
price  then  current,  would,  it  was  thought,  have  proved  ruin- 
ous to  the  town,  by  giving  the  owner  almost  a  monopoly  of 
the  soil.* 

John  Southmayd  died  Nov.  14,  1755,  aged  seventy-nine 
years  and  three  months,  outliving  all  his  children  except 
Esther,  and  all  the  original  proprietors,  so  called.  He  made 
a  will  appointing  Rev.  Mark  Leavenworth  his  executor.  He 
names,  as  his  legatees,  Esther  Starr,  Susanna  Bronson's  children, 
Anna  Bronson,  and  his  two  daughters-in-law,  "Meliscent  Judd, 
my  son  John's  w^ife  that  was,  and  Hannah  Southmayd,  my  son 
Daniel's  widow."  He  gave  £10  to  the  first  church  of  "VVater- 
bury,  "  to  be  ordered  and  disposed  of  by  tlie  pastor  and  dea- 
cons of  said  church  in  what  way  and  method  they  shall  think 
proper  and  best."  His  slaves  he  disposed  of  in  the  following- 
manner  : — 

4.  My  negro  man  Sampson  and  my  negro  Girl  Fillis,  if  they  be  faithful,  careful 
and  industrious  in  helping  to  bring  up  my  Grand  children,  AVilliam,  Samuel,  Anna, 
John  and  Daniel  Southmayd,  till  the  youngest  be  twelve  years  of  age,  then  they 
may  be  free  and  live  with  any  of  my  children  they  shall  choose,  or  any  other 
person,  and  if  they  live  with  any  of  mine,  and  should  live  to  be  a  charge  the 
charge  to  be  levied  out  of  my  estate,  except  it  should  appear  that  those  they  have 
lived  with  have  been  considerably  profited  by  them. 

The  inventory  of  Mr.  Southmayd's  estate  amounted  to 
£1,997,  lis.  8d.  The  homestead  was  valued  at  £133,  6s.  8d. ; 
library  at  £9,  6s.  4d.  ;  $250  propriety  at  £12,  10s. ;  2  brown 
cows,  £4,  16s.  8d. ;  1  young  bay  horse,  £5,  16s.  Sd. ;  12  bushels 
rye,  £1,  14s.  Od. ;  4  bushels  Indian  corn,  £0,  6s.  8d. ;  8  bushels 
oats,  £0,  6s.  8d. ;  18  sheep,  £3 ;  Sampson  and  Phillis'  time 

*  Manuscripts  of  B.  Bronson. 


2Mi4  HISTORY   OF    WATEEBURT. 

"  during  the  time  of  the  will,"  £40.  lie  owned  in  call  818 
acres  of  land,  appraised  at  £1,471,  3s.  Td.  The  standard  of 
value  appears  to  have  been  lawful  currency,  which,  at  this 
period,  was  at  least  eight  times  more  valuable  than  old  tenor 
currency. 

Several  alterations  and  improvements  of  the  meeting  house 
were  made  during  Mr.  Southmayd's  ministry,  for  the  better 
accommodation  and  the  increasing  number  of  the  people. 

[Dec.  13,  1708]  the  town  granted  to  seueral  of  the  young  men  Hlierty  to  buld 
a  small  seat  or  galerly  in  the  meeting  hous  for  themselfs  to  sit  in  it  not  [to]  priig- 
odish  the  town  or  hous 

[At  the  same  meeting  the]  town  agree  there  should  be  a  bem  put  up  for  a  gal- 
lery at  the  west  end  of  the  meeting  hous  upon  the  town  charg 

Febry  7:  1708-9:  the  town  grant  libutey  to  mr.  Southmayd  to  alter  and  inlarg 
the  set:  at  the  west  end  of  the  pulpit: 

[Dec.  1-i,  1713]  the  town  agreed  that  there  shal  be  a  galery  bult  at  won  end 
of  the  meeting  hous:  and  that  the  dors  and  windows  be  repaired 

October  the  26 — 17 15  the  Town  Granted  a  rate  of  half  apeny  on  the  pound  as 
mouy  for  to  purehes  glass*  for  the  meeting  hous  and  the  ouer  plus  for  furder 
repairing  of  said  hous 

March  7 — 1716  it  was  acted  by  uoat  that  there  shold  be  ateen  [a  ten]  pound 
i-ate  made  oute  to  be  lade  out  about  the  galliry  of  the  meeting  hous  and  the  sd 
rate  is  to  be  paid  in  prouition  pay,  wheat  at  4  shilling  per  boshill  and  rie  at  too 
and  eight  pence  pr  booshill  inden  corn  at  2  shillings  and  flax  seuen  pcnc  pr 
pound 

Desembr  the  19  (1716  at  the  same  meeting  it  was  acted  by  uoate  to  lay  the 
foundation  of  the  galiries  of  the  meeting  hous  that  is  all  three  sides  of  the  sd 
meeting  hous 

Dec  16,  1718,  "  agreed  by  note  to  giue  to  jeremiah  peek  fifteen  pound  for  what 
work  he  has  dun  to  the  meeting  hous  ali-ady  and  only  further  he  is  to  finish  the 
stairs  and  macke  four  window  frames  for  the  same  money 

As  the  result  of  these  movements,  it  appears  that  a  gallery 
was  put  up  at  the  west  end  of  the  meeting  house  for  the  pur- 
pose of  making  more  seats,  particularly  for  "the  young  men;" 
that  the  house  was  adorned  with  glass  windows  ;  that  the  doors 
were  repaired  and  the  building  generally  remodeled  (in  mod- 
ern phrase)  to  suit  it  to  the  improved  tastes  of  the  times.  All 
this  seems  to  have  been  done  at  an  expense  to  the  town  of 
fifteen  pounds,  Jeremiah  Peck  being  the  carpenter  or  con- 
tractor. 


*  Up  to  this  time,  the  house  appears   to  have  been  unglazed.    The  glass  of  those  days  was 
diamond  shaped. 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBURY.  223 

Tlie  house  now  had  additional  seats,  and  it  was  fonnd  expe- 
dient that  it  should  be  newly  seated.  It  was  customary  with 
our  fathers  to  go  through  with  this  formality  periodically,  even 
in  the  absence  of  special  occasions  like  the  present.  The  first 
seating  of  which  there  is  a  record  was  in  1702.  At  such  times, 
the  seats  were  all  classified,  and  each  person's  place  assigned 
him  according  to  the  rule  of  rank  which  had  been  agreed 
upon.  Rank  was  determined  partly  by  age  and  partly  by  list  or 
taxable  estate.  The  following  extracts  from  the  record  of  town 
meetings  show  the  nature  of  the  proceedings  on  this  subject, 
after  the  alteration  and  repairs  had  been  made. 

December  14  1719  it  was  agreed  by  uote  that  the  meating  hous  should  be  seat- 
ed and  the  rule  to  do  it  by  shall  be  by  list  of  estate  and  by  age  reaconing  one 
yeare  in  age  to  foure  pound  of  estate 

At  the  same  meeting  thai-e  was  chosen  for  comity  to  seate  the  meatinghous  cap 
Judd  left  hopkins  docter  porter 

December  28  1719  it  was  agreed  by  uote  that  the  forshorte  seate  in  the  gallery 
shall  be  deamed  eaquall  [in  rank]  with  the  piller  or  2  [nd]  seate  below,  that  is  to 
say  the  2  long  seat[s]  from  the  upper  end 

At  the  same  meating  the  above  written  act  is  made  voide  by  passing  a  uote  that 
the  short  seate  in  the  gallery  shall  be  eaquall  or  next  to  the  short  seate  below 

At  the  same  meating  there  was  chosan  by  uote  ens  hikcox  Joseph  lewis  Stephen 
ubson  jur  William  Judd  to  sit  in  [the]  fore  short  seate  in  the  gallerre  for  the  yeare 
insuing:  and  to  tacke  theire  turns  yearly  out  of  the  foure  first  seates 

But  the  people  were  not  long  satisfied  with  the  old  meeting, 
house,  notwithstanding  the  improvements  which  had  been 
made.  A  new,  and  it  may  be,  faster^  generation  had  come 
on  the  stage.  The  old  building  was  found  to  be  too  small, 
and  otherwise  inconvenient.  It  was  antiquated  in  style,  and 
an  eyesore,  doubtless,  to  the  "  young  men."  The  matter  was 
brought  up  in  town  meeting,  and  a  vote  was  passed,  Jan.  7th, 
1722-3,  "  that  we  will  Go  about  building  a  Meeting  house  as 
soon  as  we  are  able,  and  that  we  will  build  it  upon  the 
Green."  It  was  also  agreed  to  apply  "  to  the  General  Court 
in  May  next  to  Get  a  tax  on  all  the  Land  laid  out  within  the 
Town  Bounds,  and  the  money  to  be  Disposed  of  to  the  build- 
ing of  a  meeting  house." 

Though  Waterbury  had  now  started  on  the  career  of  "  prog- 
ress," its  advances  were  yet  small.  The  people  had  not  re- 
covered from  the  dire  calamities  of  former  days.      They  Mere 


2M  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBUKY. 

still  poor — out  at  the  elbows;  and  the  thought  of  new  en- 
terprises discouraged  them,  (at  least  the  more  prudent  of 
them.)  At  the  next  meeting,  therefore,  a  disposition  was 
evinced  to  be  content  with  present  accommodations  and  such 
improvements  as  might  be  added.  A  vote  was  passed,  Jan. 
28tli,  1722-3,  appointing  the  townsmen  and  Lieut.  Hopkins  a 
committee  "  to  make  some  alterations  in  the  meeting  house,  as 
has  been  discoursed,  that  there  may  be  more  conveniency  of 
siting,  and  the  seats  enlarged  by  taking  up  part  of  the  stairs 
in  the  gallery  and  making  seats  there,  and  by  stopping  up 
the  east  and  west  doars  and  making  there  what  seats  the  place 
will  allow,  and  to  mend  the  outside  of  the  meeting  house,  and 
to  raise  the  pulpit." 

I  am  not  certain  that  the  alterations  contemplated  in  the 
above  vote  were  ever  made.  If  they  were  the  people  were  not 
Ions:  satisfied  witli  them.  Their  hearts  were  set  on  having;  a  new 
meetinghouse,  and  they  believed  themselves  "able"  to  build 
one.  As  a  preparation  f(n-  so  formidable  an  undertaking,  the 
proprietors  voted,  Nov.  29th,  1726,  that  the  four  proprietors' 
lots  which  remained  out  of  the  six  which  had  been  reserved, 
in  N"ov.  1722,  for  special  occasions,  should  be  sold.  Lieut. 
William  Ilickox,  William  Judd  and  Timothy  Hopkins  were 
chosen  a  committee  to  dispose  of  them.  They  were  sold,  Jan. 
9th,  1726-7,  to  John  Thomson,  Joseph  Wells  and  David  Jud- 
son,  all  of  Stratford,  for  £262,  money.  Tlie  purchasers  be- 
came entitled  to  all  the  divisions,  past  and  prospective. 

The  following  votes  explain  themselves.  They  indicate  stir- 
ring times : 

Dec.  12,  1726  Agreed  that  we  will  build  A  meeting  house  forty  foot  wide  and 
fifty  foot  Long 

December  26,  1726.  It  appearing  that  there  was  some  Dissatisfaction  about  a 
vote  taken  Decern.  12"'  1726  with  Eespect  to  the  Dementions  of  a  meeting  house 
we  did  by  vote  conclude  that  we  would  build  a  meeting  house  as  big  as  was  then 
concluded 

Att  the  same  Meeting  It  was  agreed  that  the  Comitty  chosen  to  order  that 
affair  should  have  power  to  proportion  the  House  as  to  Lenth  and  breadth  with  the 
advise  of  the  workmen  they  shall  agree  with  to  build  the  house  Making  it  of  the 
same  bigness  as  we  have  agreed  upon 

Att  the  same  meeting  the  Town  made  Choise  of  A  Committy  to  order  the  Af!air 
of  building  A  meeting  house  as  we  have  agreed  and  to  Receive  the  money  of  the 
Committy  when  they  have  sold  the  proprietors  Lotts  that  were  Devoted  to  the 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBURY.  225 

design  and  to  Agree  with  the  workman  that  shall  be  set  About  the  work  and  for 
A  Committy  were  Chosen  Left.  John  Hopkins  Serj.  John  Scovill  Isaac  Brounson 
Sen.  Dea.  Thomas  Hickox  and  Tho  Clark 

[In  March,  172G-7,  Stephen  Hopkins  and  Lieut  Hickox  were  added  to  this 
committee  ;  but  in  December  following,  they  were  (witli  some  roughness,  as  I 
judge)  put  out  of  office — "  put  out  from  being  Meeting  house  Committe,"  says  the 
record.] 

At  the  same  meeting  [Dec.  26,  1726]  we  did  by  vote  Impower  them  [the  commit- 
tee] that  what  Timber  should  be  gott  by  perticular  persons  the  Committy  shall 
have  power  to  Cull  the  timber  and  Refuse  what  they  shall  think  not  sutable  to  be 
improved  in  the  work 

Att  the  Same  meeting  the  Town  Granted  a  Rate  of  three  pence  on  the  pound  to 
be  paid  Into  the  Committy  by  the  last  of  may  next  for  them  to  begin  the  work 
about  the  meeting  house  with 

Feb.  27,  1726-7  [it  being  represented]  that  the  timber  and  Other  materials  that 
the  Committy  had  Agreed  for  and  procured  over  did  the  Rate  of  three  pence  on 
the  pound  Some  thing  Consider  Able  we  did  by  A  vote  Agree  to  add  three  pence 
on  the  pound  to  the  Rate  Granted  In  December  26,  1726,  makeing  the  Rate  Six 
pence  on  the  pound,  the  town  Charge  for  the  year  1720  shall  be  paid  out  of  the 
Six  penny  Rate. 

June  2d  1727  It  was  by  vote  Agreed  that  the  stakes  set  down  at  the  east  End 
of  the  old  Meeting  house  shall  regulate  the  seting  of  the  new  Meeting  house,  the 
North  west  Corner  at  the  one  stake  and  the  South  west  Corner  att  the  other  stake. 

At  the  same  meeting  it  was  by  vote  agreed  that  in  Laying  the  Sills  of  the 
Meeting  house  they  shall  be  laid  two  foot  from  the  Ground  on  the  highest  Ground, 
and  the  stone  work  or  under  pining  to  be  done  accordingly. 

March  13  1727-8  Lef  Timothy  Standly  Declairing  before  the  poprietors  [meet- 
ing] that  if  they  would  quietly  resign  A  Bacheldors  Lott  to  Him  belonging  to  his 
original  Propriety  which  he  had  been  Keept  out  of  he  would  make  Sale  of  It  and 
dedicate  the  money  there  of  to  the  building  the  meeting  house  we  are  now  about 
building,  where  upon  the  proprietors  did  by  their  vote  Declare  that  they  did 
rcsighn  the  above  sd  propriety  to  the  Said  Lift  Timothy  standly  he  dedicating  of 
It  to  the  use  above  sd. 

March  ISth  1728  [1727-8]  the  Town  made  choise  of  Mr  Nathaniel  Arnold  and 
Stephen  Hopkins  to  cul  the  Shingles  that  have  been  Gott  by  perticular  persons  to 
be  laid  on  the  New  meeting  house — at  the  same  meeting  the  Town  made  choise  of 
James  Balding  with  them  to  the  same  work  of  culing  the  Shingles. 

Jan  13,  1728  [1728-9]  the  Town  Granted  a  Rate  of  two  pence  on  the  pound  on 
the  List  In  1728  to  be  Imployed  In  Carrying  on  the  work  of  the  New  Meeting 
house 

Att  the  Same  Meeting  the  Town  by  Vote  agreed  that  the  Committe  for  the 
Meeting  House  Shall  procure  the  under  flour  In  the  Meeting  House  to  be  Laid 
Double 

Thus  the  worli  went  bravely  on.     It  was  a  great  enterjDrise, 
and  drew  heavily  on  the  resources  of  the  people.     The  neces- 
sary funds  were  raised  in  diiferent  ways.    The  town  laid  taxes, 
as  we  have  seen.     Individuals  made  donations.     Dea.  John 
15 


226  HISTOKY    OF   WATERBUEY. 

Stanley  (of  Farinington)  gave  eight  acres  of  land  in  tlie  seqnes- 
ter,  and  tlie  proi3rietors  sold  some  of  the  common  lands.  The 
avails  of  the  sale  of  wild  horses  were  set  apart  as  they  had  been 
when  the  former  house  was  bnilt,  in  aid  of  the  work.  The  house, 
it  will  he  observed,  was  fifty  feet  by  forty,  or  of  ''  that  bigness  ;" 
and  as  an  illustration  of  the  greatness  of  the  work,  as  compared 
with  the  numbers  and  consequently  the  weakness  of  the  people, 
it  has  been  said  that,  at  the  time  the  frame  was  raised,  the  en- 
tire population  of  the  town,  men,  women  and  children,  could 
have  found  seats  upon  its  sills.  This  saying  possibly  a  little  ex- 
aggerates the  truth  ;  for  "Waterbury  must  have  contained,  in 
1727,  more  than  three  hundred  souls. 

I  iind  in  Dea.  Thomas  Clark's  "  account  book,"  a  charge 
against  the  town  for  "  boording  Mr.  Thomas  Dutten  and  his 
prentic  from  ye  10  april  to  the  4*i»  of  July  in  1729— £7,  16s." 
I  suspect,  but  do  not  know,  that  this  Mr.  Dutton  was  the  "  ar- 
chitect "  of  the  new  meeting  house  ;  that  he  was  of  Walliug- 
ford,  and  the  father  of  Thomas  Dutton,  avIio  settled  in  West- 
bury,  about  1757,  and  became  somewhat  celebrated  as  a 
church  builder  and  wood  carver.  The  "Waterbury  meeting- 
house, according  to  the  custom  of  the  times,  had  some  simple 
carved  work  in  the  interior.  There  is  a  brace  in  C.  D.  Kings- 
bury's barn,  over  the  main  door,  which  tradition  says  was 
taken  from  the  old  house,  which  may  be  regarded  as  a  speci- 
men of  the  work  which  adorned  that  venerable  building.-'  It 
seems  entirely  sound. 

In  June,  1729,  the  new  meeting  house,  which  stood  close 
beside  the  old  one  and  east  of  it,  was  so  far  finished  that  it 
could  be  occupied.  It  then  became  necessary  for  the  town  to 
enter  upon  the  diflicult  and  delicate  business  of  "  seating  "  the 
inhabitants.  This  seems  to  have  been  conducted  with  a  scru- 
pulous regard  to  the  dignity  of  individuals.  As  the  minister 
was  the  most  reverend  and  respectable  personage  in  the  com- 
munity, it  was  meet  that  he  and  his  family  should  be  first 
cared  for.  The  result  is  recorded  by  himself  as  clerk — "  June 
30th,  1729,  the  Town  by  vote  gave  me,  John  Southmayd,  the 
Liberty  of  Chuseing  a  seat  in  the  new  Meeting-house,  and  I 

*  It  is  a  part  of  the  tradition  that  this  brace  was  a  part  of  the  Jirst  meeting  liouse.      I  have 
had  some  reason  to  fear,  however,  that  it  belonged  to  the  second. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY.  227 

made  clioise  of  tlie  pew  next  the  pulpit  att  the  East  end  of  the 
pulpit  for  my  lamily  to  sit  in." 

It  was  tlien  voted  that  "  the  men  should  sit  in  the  west  end 
and  the  women  in  the  east  end  of  the  new  meeting  house," 
and  that  "  hut  one  head  should  be  counted  in  a  man's  list." 
So  much  being  done,  the  meeting  adjourned  for  further  delib- 
eration, perhaps.  The  next  day,  July  1st,  after  deciding  "  that 
age  should  be  considered"  in  the  business  of  seating,  "  Good- 
man Andruss  and  his  wife,  Lieut.  Hopkins  and  his  wife, 
Goodman  Barnes,  Serg.  Upson,  Sen"",  and  the  Widdow  porter 
were  voted  into  the  first  pew  att  the  west  end  of  the  pulpit." 
Andruss,  Hopkins,  Barnes  and  Upson  were,  at  the  time,  at 
an  advanced  age,  and  were  the  oldest  proprietors  and  earliest 
settlers  then  living  in  the  town.  They  were  the  surviving 
fathers  of  the  plantation.  Hence  the  propriety  of  their  occu- 
pying this  high  position  in  the  new  house — a  place  next  in 
dignity  t(^  the  minister's.  "  Widdow  porter"  was  the  widow 
<^f  Daniel  Porter,  lately  deceased,  one  of  the  original  thirty. 
To  Dr.  Warner,  now  somewhat  advanced  in  life,  was  assigned 
the  second  seat  from  the  pulpit,  on  the  men's  side. 

Having  thus  made  a  suitable  provision  for  dignity  and  age, 
it  was  in  order  to  look  after  the  people  at  large.  Having  con- 
cluded "  that  all  the  males  of  sixteen  years  and  upward  should 
be  seated,"  a  committee  was  appointed,  consisting  of  Dea. 
Thomas  Clark,  Samuel  Hickox  and  Stephen  Kelsey,  to  deter- 
mine the  rank  of  the  pews  and  to  place  the  inhabitants  in 
them,  according  to  rule.  The  rule  of  individual  rank  was 
founded  on  age  and  list,  as  on  former  occasions,  one  year  in  age 
to  be  the  equivalent  of  forty  shillings  in  the  list.  In  making 
out  lists,  the  committee  were  directed  to  take  the  three  last,  "  on 
which  the  three  rates  were  granted  for  the  building  of  the 
meeting  house." 

'No  further  movement  appears  to  have  been  made  towards 
finishino-  the  house  till  Dec.  1730.  It  was  then  voted  "  to  2:0 
on  to  finish  the  meeting  house  galleries  within  six  months." 
A  year  afterwards,  "  a  rate  of  two  pence  on  the  pound  was 
granted  towards  defraying  the  charge  of  finishing  the  meeting 
house,  and  also  for  the  town  charge  of  the  year  jjast." 

This  house  continued  the  place  of  worship  for  the  Avhole 


228  IlISTOEY    OF    WATEEBUEY. 

town  till  1738,  and  for  tlie  first  society  till  1795,  when  a  new 
lionse  was  erected.  Repairs  were  made  from  time  to  time. 
In  1752,  the  town  "  voted  to  repair  the  meeting  honse  by  hav- 
ing windows  in  front  of  twenty-four  squares  of  seven  by  nine, 
or  nine  by  ten,  witb  window  frames."  The  old  windows  were 
to  be  nsed  for  the  ends  and  back  side.  In  1769,  "  those  who 
are  seated  in  the  seats  "  had  permission,  "  at  their  own  ex- 
pense, to  turn  them  into  pews."  In  the  same  year,  I  find  on 
record  evidence  of  growing  relaxation  on  questions  of  morality 
and  propriety.  In  December,  the  town  voted,  for  reasons  not 
given,  "  that  men  and  their  wives  may  be  seated  together  in 
the  pews !" 

It  was  not  customary  "  in  olden  time  "  to  have  a  chinniey 
or  fire  in  the  meeting  house.  It  was  cold  sitting,  in  a  winter's 
day,  through  a  long  sermon,  but  the  people  were  tough. 
Those  wlio  lived  at  too  great  a  distance  to  return  home  till  the 
day's  service  was  over,  would  resort,  in  the  intermission,  to 
the  nearer  neighbors.  As  society  advanced,  however,  "  the 
sabbath  day  house,"  so  called,  was  built.  There  the  more 
distant  inhabitants  repaired,  the  morning  service  over,  to  thaw 
their  frosty  limbs  before  a  rousing  fire.  There  they  ate  the 
dinner  and  drank  the  cider  which  they  had  brought  from  home. 
The  first  notice  of  sabbath  day  houses  in  Waterbury  is  in  171:3. 
In  December  of  that  year,  "  upon  motion  by  some  persons  for 
liberty  to  set  up  saboth  day  houses  in  the  highway,  the  town 
appointed  a  committee  to  hear  the  request  and  appoint  what 
place  they  shall  build  on."  Nothing,  however,  appears  to 
have  been  done  at  this  time,  and  in  December,  1761,  "the 
town  gave  liberty  to  such  farmers  as  have  a  mind  to  build 
sabbath  day  houses  of  seting  them  in  the  highway  against  san- 
day  hollow,  on  the  north  side,  above  Thomas  Bronson's." 
They  were  allowed  ground  twelve  or  sixteen  feet  in  width, 
and  twenty  rods  long,  which  appears  to  have  been  imjDroved.'^ 

*  The  subject  of  burying  yards  may  require  a  few  remarks.  The  old  yard  on  Grand  street  is 
not  mentioned  in  the  early  records  of  Waterbury  now  in  existence,  except  incidentally.  It  dates 
doubtless  from  the  beginning  of  the  settlement.  There  the  dust  of  our  fathers  was  laid,  though 
no  monuments  identify  the  earlier  graves.  In  the  old  ground  (the  northwest  portion  of  the  pre- 
sent yard)  were  deposited  all  the  dead  of  the  town  till  1709. 

"  Aprill  11  1T09  the  seelect  men  of  waterbury  with  the  presens  and  consentt  of  samll  hickox 
Layed  outt  and  sequestered  half  an  acur  of  land  of  said  hickox  one  the  southerd  end  of  a  hill  at 
judds  medow  cald  the  pin[e]  hill  one  the  est  side  the  riuer  between  thomas  judd  jur  his  land  for  a 


mSTOJRY    OF    WATEKBURY.  229 

The  State's  committee  and  tlie  proprietors  of  the  towu,  from 
time  to  time,  as  has  already  been  stated,  made  the  most  liberal 
provision  for  the  support  of  religion.  IN'otwithstanding  this,  it 
was  found,  after  Mr.  Southmayd's  settlement  in  1705,  that  there 
was  no  adequate  fund  remaining.  One  £150  propriety  reserved 
in  the  beginning,  had  been  bestowed  on  Mr.  Peck.  A  like  pro- 
priety had  been  given  to  Mr.  Southmayd.  The  mistake  had 
been  made  of  giving  to  the  minister,  instead  of  for  the  use  of 
the  minister.  Only  a  few  acres  of  land  had  been  granted  specifi- 
cally for  this  last  object — a  house  lot  of  two  acres,  three  acres  in 
the  little  pasture,  and  fifteen  acres  on  Steel's  Brook.  Under  these 
circumstances,  and  to  provide  for  the  permanent  maintenance 
of  the  ministry,  the  proprietors  passed  this  vote  : 

Dec.  13,  1715.  It  was  agreed^by  vote  that  in  the  division  now  to  be  hiid  out 
there  shall  be  a  division  of  one  hundred  and  fifty  pound  propriety  laid  out  with  it 
to  be  disposed  of  by  the  town  for  the  encouragement  of  the  Gospel  in  the  town  of 
Waterbury. 

This  right  was  not  entitled  to  the  bachelor  accommoda- 
tions ;  and  yet  the  divisions  which,  at  difterent  times,  have 
been  made  on  it,  have  amounted  to  many  hundred  acres,  the 
income  of  which,  had  the  land  been  well  selected,  would  have 
supported^several  ministers.  But  the  benevolent  intentions  of 
our  ancestors  were  defeated.  The  lands  designed  to  have  been 
kept  sacred  for  the  maintenance  of  religious  institutions  have, 
with  a  single  small  exception,  disappeared,  as  liave  the  moneys 
derived  from  their  sale.  Soon  after  Westbury  and  Xorthbury 
were  set  off  as  distinct  societies,  dissensions  began  to  prevail ; 
the  people  grew  careless  of  their  permanent  interests ;  and  the 

burying  plas  for  that  part  of  sad  town  or  any  other  as  shall  se  cas  to  mak  use  of  it  for  sad  use 
thaer  one  sad  day  the  wife  of  danell  warner  was  buryd:  layd  out  by  us  with  consent  of  the 
naburliood. 

Thomas  Jddd  snr  )     ,     «  „      ,, 

This  ground  is  on  the  hill  on  the  east  side  of  the  present  New  Haven  road,  a  little  above  the 
bridge  in  Naugatuck.  When  the  writer  was  a  boy,  the  earth  often  gave  way  on  the  precipitous 
western  bank,  carrying  the  exposed  bones  far  down  the  hill  towards  the  road. 

In  December,  1734,  a  committee  was  appointed  "  to  purchase  at  town  cost  half  an  acre  of  land 
out  eastward  near  Joseph  Atkins  for  a  burying  yard."  This  was  on  the  Farmingtou  road,  and 
is,  I  suppose,  the  yard  now  used  in  East  Farms  district. 

In  1736,  March  2d,  the  town  bought  for  fifty  shillings,  of  Elnathan  Taylor,  "one  acre  and 
fifty  two  rods  up  the  river  ['  at  Northeud,'  or  Northbury]  on  a  plain  by  his  house,  or  a  little 
northward  of  it,  and  north  of  Twitch  Grass  Brook,  a  triangle  piece,  bounded  east  on  highway,, 
west  on  Joseph  Gillet's  land,  south  on  common  land  " — "  for  a  Burying  Place  to  be  sequestered. 
and  set  apart  for  that  use  " — "  to  bury  their  dead  in  as  they  have  occasion." 


230  IIISTOKY    OF   WATERBUEY. 

town,  in  town  meeting,  decided,  Jan.  7,  1739-40,  "  after  a  long 
discussion  and  mncli  opposition,"  to  sell  the  ministerial  estate 
growing  out  of  tlie  grant  of  1715,  (as  it  liad  antliority  to  do,) 
"  taking  mortgages  for  the  principal  and  bonds  for  the  inter- 
est." It  was  designed  to  distribute  the  avails  among  the  diifer- 
ent  societies.  A  portion  of  the  land  was  sold  by  a  special 
committee  (of  the  town)^Samuel  Hickox,  Timothy  Hopkins 
and  John  Bronson — as  early  as  Jan.  24,  1739-40.  Other 
pieces  were  disposed  of  soon  after,  the  purchaser  giving  "  se- 
curity for  principal  and  interest  yearly  at  some  set  time,  either 
by  surety  or  land."  Mr.  Southmayd,  the  town  treasurer,  was 
chosen  to  have  the  custody  of  the  notes  and  bonds  taken  in 
payment,  "  and  to  deliver  the  same  to  the  several  societies' 
committees  when  orderly  called  for,"  and  said  committees 
were  authorized  "  to  sue  out  the  notes  and  bonds  of  particular 
persons,  if  there  be  occasion."  The  special  committee  was  also 
directed  "  to  make  sale  of  the  remainder  of  the  [ministry] 
land,  if  under  circumstances  that  it  may  be  sold."  At  the 
next  meeting,  held  March  30th,  1741,  it  was  agreed  that  "the 
ministry  land  sequestered  by  the  grand  committee  might  be 
sold  and  the  use  of  the  money  be  to  the  use  of  the  ministry  in 
Waterbury,"  This  land,  consisting  of  the  three  pieces  al- 
ready referred  to,  the  town,  it  is  believed,  had  no  control 
over.  It  could  not  be  sold  by  the  terms  of  the  grant.  It 
was  to  "  remain  for  the  use,  occupation  and  improvement  of 
the  ministry  of  the  town  forever,  without  any  alteration  or 
disposal,  [or  other]  use  or  improvement  whatsoever,"  JSTothingj 
however,  now  remains,  with  the  exception  of  the  "little  pas- 
ture," (the  parsonage  lot  of  the  First  Congregational  Society ;) 
and  how  this  happens  to  have  been  preserved  is  a  marvel. 
In  December,  1756,  after  it  had  been  set  at  liberty  by  Mr. 
Southmayd's  death,  the  proprietors  voted  that  it  should  "  be 
for  the  use  of  the  several  schools  in  the  town  of  Waterbury,  to 
be  disposed  of  as  the  other  school  lands  heretofore  hath  been." 
l!^ext  the  town  concluded  to  try  its  hand.  In  December, 
1757,  it  "  voted  that  y«  select  men  shall  rent  it  [the  little  pas- 
ture] out  for  y®  insuing  year  and  put  y^  money  into  y^  town 
treasury."  But  neither  the  proprietors  nor  the  town  could 
properly  have  any  voice  in  the  matter.     Much  less  could  they 


HISTORY    OF   AVATEKBUET.  231 

divert  it  from  its  original  purpose.  The  land  was  given  by 
the  colonial  government  by  its  committee,  and  tlie  grant, 
along  with  others  made  "  for  pnblic  and  plons  nses,"  had  been 
ratified  and  made  perpetual  by  the  action  of  the  General 
Court. 

Again,  in  ISil,  when  the  funds  with  which  the  society  was 
to  2)ay  for  the  fonrth  new  meeting  house  were  not  forthcom- 
ing, the  conmiittee  who  had  charge  of  the  business  proposed 
to  sell  the  parsonage  lot.  Bennet  Bronson  objected  to  this,  and 
stated  that  the  property  conld  not  be  sold  by  the  terms  of  the 
gift.  He,  however,  saw  no  objection  to  leasing  the  land  for  a 
series  of  years,  by  which  an  amount  approaching  its  cash  value 
might  be  secured  for  the  treasury,  and  ottered  liimself  to  take  a 
lease  for  twenty  years,  paying  for  the  same  three  hundred  and 
forty-fonr  dollars.  The  proposition  was  accepted.  When  the 
lease  had  run  about  eight  years,  Mr.  Bronson  died,  when,  by 
direction  of  his  will,  the  little  pasture  returned  to  the  society, 
worth,  from  good  husbandry,  and  the  rise  of  lands  in  the  neigh- 
borhood, many  fold  what  it  was  when  it  went  into  his  posses- 
sion. May  it  remain  for  the  use  originally  designed,  '•  with- 
out any  alteration  or  disposal,"  forever."- 

Tlie  friends  of  the  Church  of  England  attempted,  at  an  early 
period,  to  obtain  their  proportion  of  the  ministerial  lands,  or 
of  the  moneys  arising  from  their  sale.  The  town,  however,  took 
upon  itself  the  business  of  distributing  these  funds,  and  the 
Episcopalians  appear  to  have  been  out-voted  in  town  meeting. 
In  December,  1703,  the  town  appointed  Thomas  Matthews, 
John  Welton,  Samuel  Hickox,  Jr.,  Abraham  Hickox  and 
David  Warner,  a  "committee  to  examine  the  records  con- 
sarning  the  ministerial  lands  and  moneys,  and  make  report  to 
an  adjourned  meeting  ;"  but  at  the  next  meeting,  in  February, 
a  proposition  to  hear  the  report  was  "  answered  in  the  nega- 
tive.'' But  in  1770,  the  strength  of  the  new  sect  was  much 
augmented.  They  had  become  numerous  in  I^orthbury,  West- 
bury  and  in  all  parts  of  the  town.  In  this  year,  by  uniting  them- 

*  Since  the  above  was  written,  the  land  in  question,  all  but  a  fraction,  has  been  seized  and  ap- 
propriated, under  its  charter,  by  the  Hartford,  Providence  and  Fishkill  Railroad  Co.  For  about 
three  quarters  of  it  the  company  paid  the  society  six  thousand  dollars.  The  money  thus  ob- 
tained has  been  invested  in  a  house  and  lot  on  Leavenworth  street,  for  a  parsonage,  now  im- 
proved by  the  pastor.  Rev.  Sir.  AVoodworth. 


Zoli  HISTOET   OF   -VVATEEBUKT. 

selves  with  the  friends  of  an  equal  clistribution  of  all  the  school 
moneys  to  all  the  societies  of  the  town,  they  were  able  to  com- 
mand a  majority  of  the  votes.  A  sort  of  "  omnibns  hill"  was 
framed,  which  was  passed  March  12th,  1770.  It  embraced  the 
two  objects  to  which  reference  has  been  made.  That  part  of 
it  which  relates  more  particularly  to  the  ministerial  funds  is 
as  follows : 

And  whereas,  likewise,  there  are  certain  moneys  in  the  abovesaid  town  appro- 
priated to  the  support  of  the  gospel  arising  from  the  sale  of  lands  given  by  the 
proprietors,  at  their  meeting  Dec.  15,  1*715,  to  be  disposed  of  by  the  town  for  the 
purpose  above  sd,  and  the  church  of  England  claiming  their  equal  proportion  of 
the  same,  the  town,  at  their  present  meeting,  taking  into  consideration  the  above 
sd  claims  with  respect  to  the  ministerial  and  school  money,  agree  by  vote  that 
the  above  sd  moneys  be  forever  hereafter  divided  according  to  the  above  sd  claims, 
and  that  the  societies  and  parts  of  societies  that  shall  hereafter  be  made  shall  be 
entitled  to  a  like  privilege. 

Against  this  entire  vote,  the  committees  (school  and  eccle- 
siastical) of  the  first  society  protested.  The  school  committee's 
protest  will  be  found  in  another  place.  That  of  the  society's 
committee  runs  in  this  wise  : 

Whereas  the  town  of  Waterbury  formerly  (when  consisting  of  but  one  ecclesias- 
tical society)  was  possessed  of  certain  large  quantities  of  lands  devoted  to  the  use  of 
the  ministry  in  the  same.  And  whereas,  since  the  sd  town  has  been  divided  into 
several  ecclesiastical  societies,  the  inhabitants  of  sd  societies  convened  in  a  town 
meeting  did  formerly  undertake  by  their  votes  to  sell  part  of  the  sd  lands,  and  to 
divide  the  interest  of  the  moneys  raised  thereby  to  and  amongst  sd  societies — 
And  now  the  said  inhabitants  have  also  voted  that  a  certain  party  called  the 
church  of  England,  (which  had  no  existence  in  sd  town  when  sdlands  was  granted 
to  the  use  of  the  ministry  therein,)  shall  have  their  equal  proportion  of  s^ 
moneys,  all  which  votes  are  an  affringement  on  the  property  of  the  first  society  of 
sd  "Waterbury  and  contrary  to  the  laws  of  this  Colony Therefore  we  the  sub- 
scribers, society's  committee  in  sd  first  society,  do  enter  this  our  protest  moi-e  es- 
pecially against  the  last  of  the  above  sd  votes  made  this  day,  as  it  is  also  against  law 
and  equity  and  the  most  important  rites  and  interest  of  this  society  and  against  the 
common  sence  and  practice  of  mankind,  and  request  the  same  may  be  recorded  in 
the  office  of  the  town  clerk  in  sd  AVaterbury.     Dated  March  12,  ITTO. 

(Signed)  Andrew  Bronson,  Joseph  Hopkins,  Ashbel  Porter,  Dan.  Welton, 
Ezra  Bronson,  society's  committee  of  the  first  society  of  Waterbury. 

In  the  spring  of  the  following  year,  (1771,)  the  iirst  society, 
by  its  agents,  Joseph  Hopkins  and  Ezra  Bronson,  petitioned  the 
Assembly  for  relief.  They  said  that  all  the  ministerial  lands 
had  been  sold,  except  the  little  pasture,  for  £303,  14s.  6d. 
— that  the  interest  had  been  divided  among  the  several  par- 


HISTORY    or   WATEKBrKY.  233 

islies  till  March,  1770,  when  a  dissatisfied  party  of  "West- 
biiry,  long  discontented  because  they  had  not  a  share  of  the 
moneys  derived  from  the  sale  of  the  western  lands,  (with  the  aid 
of  certain  Church-of-England-men,)  assembled  and  passed  the 
obnoxious  vote.  In  August  past,  (the  memorial  continued,) 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox  and  Abraham  Andrews,  a  commit- 
tee of  Westbury,  Jotham  Curtis,  a  committee  of  Northbury, 
and  Capt.  Edward  Scovill  and  Capt.  Abraham  Hickox  of 
Waterbury,  "  for  the  professors  of  the  Church  of  England," 
"  met  at  the  town  clerk's  office  and  carried  ofi"  about  three  quar- 
ters of  the  whole  interest  of  said  ministerial  money,"  tfec. 

The  petition,  which  prayed  that  the  money  might  be  return- 
ed, or  an  order  passed  concerning  the  disposal  of  it,  was  denied. 

But  soon  the  Revolutionary  war  broke  out.  The  Church-of- 
England-men  sjanpathized  with  the  mother  country,  and 
the  vote  which  gave  them  a  share  of  the  ministerial  money, 
was  found  in  town  meeting  to  be  "  a  very  jumbled,  unin- 
telligible one,  and  as  understood  by  some,  illegal  and  un- 
just, and  inconsistent  with  the  design  of  the  donors  of  said 
lands."  The  obnoxious  vote,  therefore,  so  far  as  it  related  to 
the  Church  of  England,  was  "  declared  to  be  entirely  vacated 
and  of  no  effect."   The  other  parts  of  the  vote  were  to  "  stand." 

There  was,  perhaps,  some  informality  respecting  the  meet- 
ing which  passed  this  repealing  vote,  or  in  its  action  in  refer- 
ence to  the  same  ;  for  at  a  meeting  held  March,  1780,  the  vote 
was  again  passed,  and  j)ut  upon  record. 

When  it  was  proposed  that  Westbury  and  Northbury  should 
be'set  off  as  a  distinct  town,  and  the  consent  of  Waterbury  was 
asked,  it  was  given  on  condition  that  the  new  town  should  re- 
linquish all  claim  to  the  ministerial  and  school  moneys.  The 
act  of  incorporation  said  nothing  about  these  moneys,  and  the 
question  was  left  to  be  adjusted  by  the  parties  interested.  In 
Dec.  1786,  the  town  of  Waterbury  appointed  Capt.  Gideon 
Hotchkiss,  Joseph  Hopkins,  Esq.  and  Mr.  Daniel  Byington  a 
committee  to  settle  "these  matters"  with  WatertoM'n.  In 
December,  1787,  another  committee  was  chosen,  consisting  of 
Joseph  Hopkins,  Esq.,  Capt.  Isaac  Bronson,  Mr.  Josiah 
Bronson,  John  Welton,  Ezra  Bronson  and  Samuel  Lewis, 
Esquires,  to  meet  a  committee  of  Watertown  to  settle  the  "  con- 


234  niSTOKT  OF  wateebury. 

troversy,"  witli  full  power  "  to  relincpisli  siicli  part  of  oiir 
claim  to  said  property  as  they  sliall  judge  prudent,"or  to  agree 
to  leave  the  question  to  referees,  or  arbitrators. 

In  April  following,  the  committee  reported  that  they  could 
not  agree,  eacli  party  thinking  right  was  on  its  side.  In  De- 
cember, 1788,  a  vote  was  taken  and  passed  to  choose  a  commit- 
tee "  to  negotiate  the  matter  with  Watertown,"  and  to  settle 
it  in  such  manner  as  they  might  think  prudent,  lyrovided 
they  could  obtain  favorable  terms,  &c. 

When  Farmingbury  came  to  apply  for  town  privileges,  in 
1787  and  subsequently,  the  people  of  the  old  town  took  the 
same  position  as  they  did  in  the  case  of  Westbury  and  North- 
bury,  and  w^ere  met  by  the  same  opposition. 

In  October,  1793,  pending  an  application  to  the  General  As- 
sembly for  an  act  of  incorporation,  the  town  voted  that  if  the 
society  of  Farmingbury  would  within  eight  days  give  the  old 
town  "  a  legal  acquittance  of  all  their  right  in  the  public  min- 
isterial and  school  moneys  and  other  property,"  &c.,  then  the 
town  would  not  appear  against  the  memorial  of  Farmingbury. 


CHAP  TEE    XA". 


SCHOOLS. 


Connecticut  has  been  long  distinguished  for  its  common 
schools.  The  Code  of  Laws  established  by  the  General  Court 
in  1650  recognized  their  importance. 

It  being  one  chiefc  project  of  that  old  deluder  Sathan  [says  this  Code]  to  keepe 
men  from  a  knowledge  of  the  scriptures,  as  in  former  times  keeping  them  in  an  un- 
knowne  tongue,  so  in  the  latter  times  by  perswading  them  from  the  use  of 
Tongues,  so  that  at  least  the  true  sence  and  meaning  of  the  originall  might  bee 
clouded  with  false  glosses  of  saint  seeming  deceiuers  ;  and  that  learning  may  not 
bee  buried  in  the  graue  of  o"'  Forefathers,  in  Church  and  Common  wealth,  the  Lord 
assisting  our  endeauors — It  is  there  fore  ordered  by  this  Courte  that  euery  Town- 
shipp  [&c.]— [Trumbull's  Col.  Records,  Vol.  I,  p.  554.] 


HISTORY   OF   AVATEKBURY.  235 

The  grand  committee,  when  they  reserved  the  three  "  great 
lots,"  doubtless  had  reference  to  tlie  interests  of  education.  I 
do  not  tind,  ho-svever,  the  school  lot  particularly  mentioned  in 
any  of  their  proceedings.  It  would  seem  that  the  proprietors 
■were  allowed  some  discretion  in  the  disposition  of  at  least  two 
of  the  lots  in  question.  When  Mr.  Peck  came  to  be  settled, 
as  an  inducement,  one  of  the  £150  i:>roprieties  was  divided, 
equally,  I  suppose,  (in  1790,)  between  Jeremiah  Peck,  Jr.,  and 
"  the  school."*  In  doing  tliis,  the  proprietors  doubtless 
thought  they  were  securing  the  "  public  and  pious  "  ends  con- 
templated by  the  committee. 

-  There  is  nothing  to  show  when  schools  were  first  set  up  in 
AYaterbury.  A  statute,  however,  required  "  that  every  Town 
having  a  less  number  of  Householders  than  seventy  shall 
Yearl}^  from  Year  to  Year  be  provided  of  a  sufficient  school- 
master, to  teach  Children  and  Youth  to  Write  and  Read  for 
one  half  of  the  year,"  and  "  that  each  Town  shall  annually  pay 
Forty  Shillings  for  every  Thousand  Pounds  in  their  respec- 
tive Country  Lists,  towards  the  Maintenance  of  the  School 
Master  in  tlie  Town,"  &c.  The  earliest  town  record,  on  the 
subject  of  schools,  bears  the  date  of  1698.     Here  it  is  : 

Decembr:  19d  1698  y«  town  granted  3iis  with  )«  last  yeirs  rent  of  y«  scooU 
land  for  y''  incuragment  of  a  scoU  for  four  moneths  or  longer  if  it  can  be  obtayued 
and  deacen  Thomas  Judd  Ensign  Standly  &  John  hopkins  was  chosen  a  committy 
to  cndeuiour  to  procure  one  to  keep  scool  to  teach  in  righting  as  well  as  reading 

[The  first  volume  of  the  record  of  town  meetings  commences  with  the  date  of 
the  above  entry,  and  with  page  98th,  the  paging  being  continued,  probably,  from 
some  former  book.  Whether  any  separate  record  of  the  proper  business  of  town 
meetings  was  made  previous  to  this  time  is  not  quite  certain.] 

The  extracts  below  show  what  was  done  by  the  town,  from 
year  to  year,  on  this  subject : 

December:  18d:  1699  y^  town  granted  30  shiling  and  y^  scoal  money  for  y* 
incuragment  of  a  scoal  for  three  moneths 

John  hopkins  benjamin  barns  and  Stephen  uljson  was  chosen  a  commity  to  hyre 
a  scoal  master  for  three  moneths  if  they  can 

Decembr:  21:  1702:  benjamin  barns  senor  and  Stephen  ubson  senr  was  chosen 
a  committy  to  hyr  a  scoolmaster  for  to  keep  scoal  for  thre  moneths 

Att  ye  same  meeting  John  Richards  and  John  judd  was  chosen  a  committy  to 

*  This  appears,  not  from  record,  but  from  a  petition  to  the  General  Assembly,  April,  1771, 
signed  by  the  society's  committee,  in  reference  to  the  ministerial  moneys.  In  the  earlier  divisions 
of  fence,  the  three  reserved  proprieties  were  entered  as  "  great  lots." 


236  HISTOET    OF   WATEKBUKT. 

hire  a scoal  dame  for  to  keep  scoal  in  y«  sumer  and  for  y'  end  tomake  use  of  what 
money  shall  be  left  y'  is  due  to  y^  scool  for  y^  scoll  land  after  y^  scool  maste:"  is  payd 

[Dec.  5,  1704]  serg.  Isaac  brunson  and  benjamin  berns  senr  was  chosen  scool 
coni~ity  to  hire  a  scoolmaster  to  instruct  in  wrighting  and  reeding  as  long  as  they 
can  and  to  haue  what  y^  country  i.a  lows  for  y'  end  and  to  hire  a  scoal  dame  to 
teach  scool  in  y^  sumer  and  for  y'  scool  to  let  ye  scoll  land  at  sum  publick  meeting 
to  be  improued  for  y^  sumer  scool  [&c.] 

[Dec.  9,  1*706]  docf  porter  and  iohn  Richards  was  chosen  scool  com~t  to  hire 
a  scool  master  for  three  moneths  and  a  scoal  dame  for  y^  sum— r  as  fare  as  y® 
scool  money  will  go 

[Dec.  8,  1707]  Stephen  upson  sen  and  John  scouill  and  John  Richason  wer  chosn 
comiti  to  se  after  the  bulding  a  scool  hous  which  the  town  by  uoat  pased  to  be 
bult  and  the  sd  hous  is  to  be  bult  fourteen  foot  wide  and  sixteeen  in  length 

Desember  28  1709  [the  same  persons]  ware  chosen  a  commity  to  cary  on  the 
work  of  bulding  a  scoull  hous  in  said  town 

Fabry  20  1709-10  Thomas  hickox  was  chosen  a  comity  with  dauid  scott  and 
Richard  porter  formerly  chosen  for  this  year  for  to  hire  a  scool  master  to  tech 
scoull  and  a  dam  if  need  be 

October  ye  18  1720  it  was  agreed  by  uote  that  thay  would  haue  a  rate  of  twelue 
pound  for  the  riging  up  the  scoll  hous  and  other  charge  in  the  town  so  far  as  it  will  go 

Thare  was  chosan  for  comety  to  see  that  the  scol  hous  be  dun  and  repared 
dauid  Scott  ser  thomas  brunson  and  Stephen  hopkins 

10  December  1723.  It  was  Acted  that  the  School  Committe  Shall  yearly  De- 
mand the  Country  money  [the  money  required  to  be  raised  by  the  colony  law  ?] 
And  the  Money  that  the  School  Land  was  Let  for  and  pay  the  School  And  yearly 
Give  an  Account  at  our  great  town  Meeting  of  their  Receivings  and  Disbursements 
and  their  account  Shall  be  Recorded. 

The  School  Committe  for  1723  which  was  Thomas  Hikcox  and  Thomas  Broun- 
son  laid  y""  accounts  before  the  town  that  their  Receivings  were  6 — 9 — 0  and 
their  Disbursements  to  the  school  6 — 9 — 0  and  that  there  was  coming  to  the  town 
25  shillings  in  Doc.  Worners  hand  and  seven  and  six  pence  in  Richard  weltons 
hand  for  school  land  let  to  them. 

These  votes  and  memoranda  of  tlie  town  clerk  prove  the 
earnest  endeavors  of  the  early  people  of  Waterbmy,  in  a  time 
of  great  embarrassment,  to  provide  the  means  of  an  elementary 
education  for  the  young.  Though  they  appeared  not  to  do  as 
much,  in  every  case,  as  the  statute  required,  they  doubtless 
did   all  that  their  circumstances  permitted. 

It  is  impossible  to  ascertain  who  were  the  early  schoolmas- 
ters and  "  school  dames "  of  AVaterbury.  There  is  reason, 
however,  to  believe  that  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  taught  a  school 
before  he  removed  to  Farmington,  (early  in  1709,)  as  has  al- 
ready been  suggested ? 

more  than  forty  years  after  "Waterbury  was  settled,  tliere 
seems  to  have  been  no  school  in  the  town  except  at  the  center, 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUKY.  237 

and  no  school  house  except  the  small  one  sixteen  feet  bj  four- 
teen, first  occupied,  probably,  in  1710.  There  a  school  was 
taught  by  a  schoolmaster  for  three  or  four  months  during  the 
cold  season  of  each  3- ear,  and  by  a  "  school  dame,"  "  if  need 
be,"  and  one  was  to  be  liad,  in  the  summer.  Thus  our  fathers 
got  the  little  schooling  they  possessed.  Thus  are  accounted 
for  their  literary  infirmities.  They  were  rough  farmers  living 
in  a  rough  country  and  in  a  rough  age.  They  were  skillful  in 
chopping,  grubbing,  hoeing  and  "  moin,"  but  had  little  leisure 
or  taste  for  letters.  They  had  not,  for  a  long  time,  what  may 
be  called  an  educated  man  among  them,  except  their  minis- 
ters. They  furnished  no  graduate  of  college  for  the  first  forty 
years,  and  no  graduate  settled  in  the  town  for  the  first  sixty- 
three  years. 

After  the  population  of  the  town  had  extended  from  the  cen- 
ter in  difterent  directions,  each  neighborhood  that  would  keep 
u])  a  school,''and  had  a  sufficient  number  of  scholars,  was  allow- 
ed a  proportion  of  the  school  money.  The  first  notice  of  these 
outside  schools  is  in  1730  : 

[Dec.  14,  1730]  It  was  Agreed  by  Vote  that  at  Judds  Meadow  According  to 
their  families  they  Shall  have  their  School  Money  According  to  their  list — And 
Woster  Swamp  and  Bucks  Hill  Shall  have  the  same  privillidge  provided  Each 
party  Keep  and  Maintain  A  school  according  to  the  Intent  of  the  Law  In  that 
Ca^e. 

[Then  follow  lists  of  liimilies  at  these  several  places.  It  will  be  noticed  that 
Isaac  Bronson  is]placed  with  the  Judd's  Meadow  people.] 

Families  at  Judd's  Meadow : — Serg.  Joseph  Lewis,  Saml.  Scott,  John  Andruss, 
Jos.  Lewis,  Jr.,  Edmund  Scott,  Jr.,  John  Barnes,  Saml.  Barnes,  John  Johnson, 
James  Brown,  Ebenezer  Hickox,  Saml.  Warnei',  Sen.,  Saml.  Warner,  Jr.,  Isaac 
Bronson.  At  Woster  Swamp : — Jonathan  Scott,  Sen.,  Jonathan  Scott,  Jr.,  Ger- 
shom  Scott,  David  Scott,  Samuel  Thomas,  Ebenezer  Warner,  Ebenezer  Kichason, 
Doct.  John  Warner,  Geo.  Welton,  Jas.  Williams,  Jos.  Nichols,  Jona.  Kelsey,  Abra- 
ham Utter,  John  Sutliff",  Isaac  Castle,  Jos.  Hurlbut,  Henry  Cook.  At  Bucks- 
hill : — Serg.  Richard  Welton,  Richard  Welton,  Jr.,  Benj.  Worner,  John  Worner, 
Obadiah  Worner,  Joseph  Judd,  Wm.  Scott. 

Dec.  10,  1734  Voted  that  A  School  be  keep  by  A  School  Master  the  Whole 
year  Following  As  the  Law  Directs  beginning  In  January  Xext  and  to  Be  Keep 
Seven  Months  In  the  Town  spot  And  Nine  Weeks  In  the  North  west  farms 
[Wooster  Swamp]  And  Seven  Weeks  in  the  South  farms  [Judd's  Meadow]  provi- 
ded that  there  be  not  less  than  Seven  Scholers  In  the  School  And  If  they  fail  In 
Any  part  of  the  Town  the  Money  to  Go  to  those  parts  of  the  Town  that  Maintain 
the  School  With  Scholars. 

In  1717,  an  amended  school  law  was  passed,  requiring  each 


r^dO  niSTOKY    OF    WATEEBUEY. 

town  in  the  Colony  having  seventy  families  to  maintain  a 
school  at  least  eleven  months  in  a  year.  The  above  vote  is 
the  first  indication  that  the  families  in  Waterbnry  had  reached 
that  nnmber,  bringing  them  within  the  ]3rovisions  of  the  law. 

Decern"'  12''^  1*787  It  was  voted  that  [the  School  for  the  year  ensiung  shall  be 
keept  twenty  one  weeks  in  the  town  spott  and  twelve  weeks  at  "Woster  Society 
and  six  weeks  up  the  river  and  six  weeks  att  Judd's  Meadow  and  also  three  weeks 
att  Bucks  Hill  on  such  Conditions  that  said  schools  shall  maintain  seven  Scholers 
at  each  School. 

It  seems-  intended  in  this  vote  to  proportion  the  nnmber  of 
weeks  which  the  school  was  to  be  maintained,  in  these  several 
places,  to  the  number  of  scholars  to  be  accommodated  in  each. 
The  ^ame  schoolmastjuuisually  taught  all  the  schools,  going 
Irom  place  _ to,  place. 

After  a  new  meeting  house  had  been  erected,  it  was  ascer- 
tained that  the  old  school  house  was  not  in  keeping  with 
the  other  improvements  on  the  green.  A-Jnovement  was 
made  in  Feb.  1730-31,  designed  to  £jacjiiie._a_new  school  house 
of  increased  dimensions  and  improved  style.  But  the  j)ro- 
ject  was  promj^tly  voted  down  in  town  meeting.  The  people 
were  not  disposed  to  enter  into  new  en t.erprises._  involving  ex- 
pense. In  December  following,  however,  they  changed  their 
mind^,  "  and  voted  to  build  a  school  house  of  twenty  foot 
square  on  the  meeting  house  green."  They  changed  agaiii  on 
the  twelfth  of  December,  1732,  and  "concluded  that' they 
would  not  build  a  school  house."  At  the  same  time  they  "al- 
lowed the  charge  of  five  pounds  9  shillings  and  sixpence,  for 
geting  and  drawing  timber  for  the  school  house,  the  timber 
to  be  the  towns."  We  hear  nothing  more  of  the  enterprise 
till  December,  1743,  Avhen  the  town  "  granted  liberty  to  set  a 
school  house  where  the  old  house  stood."  Each  school  dis- 
trict or  societ}Mjuilt.ttsjiB'XL  house. 

In  December,  1738,  a  vote  was  passed  to  divide  the  school 
moneys  among  the  difierent  societies  "  according  to  their  lists 
of  estate."  In  December,  1749,  the  first  society  of  Waterbury 
was  divided  into  four  districts  for  school  purposes,  to  wit. 
Town  Plot,  (town  center,)  Buclvshill,  Judd's  Meadow  and 
t  Breakneck,  each  (provided  fifteen  scholars  were  furnished)  to 
have  its  proportion  of  schooling  and  school  money. 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBURY.  239 

The  school  hinds  which  came  from  the  half  of  the  £150 
propriety  were  at  first  rented.  The  rents  were  considered  as 
at  the  disj)osal  of  the  town.  They  were  appropriated,  for  a 
time,  to  various  public  objects,  besides  the  maintenance  of 
schools,  without  apparently  any  show  of  right.  I  observe, 
however,  no  instance  of  such  misappropriation  after  1714. 

The  renting  of  the  school  lands,  the  repair  of  the  fences,  and 
the  care  of  them  generally,  occasioned  much  trouble  and  some 
loss.  A  committee  was  therefore  appointed,  in  1734,  to  devise 
a  plan  for  the  legal  and  proper  disposal  of  these  lands.  They 
reported  Dec.  lOtli,  and  recommended 

That  a  Committee  be  appointed  to  make  Sale  of  All  the  School  Land  and  pro- 
priety belonging  to  the  Same  And  that  sd  Committee  make  Sale  of  all  the  Meadow 
Lotts  to  the  Highest  Bider  att  Some  public  time  and  that  sd  Committee  be  Impow- 
cred  to  Give  Deeds  to  Such  persons  as  Shall  Give  most  for  sd  Lotts  and  out  Lands 
which  Deeds  Shall  be  held  Good  to  the  Grantee  for  the  term  of  Nine  Hundred 
Ninety  Nine  years  and  that  the  buyer  Shall  pay  the  Money  Down  or  mortgage 
Lands  for  the  Security  of  the  principle  and  Give  bonds  yearly  for  the  Interest  of 
such  Sums  as  he  Shall  Give  for  Such  perticular  Lands  as  he  Shall  So  buy  and  that 
the  sd  Committee  Shall  Have  A  Seasonable  time  to  [dispose  of]  the  propriety  and 
the  Lands  that  are  to  be  Laid  out  on  Sd  Eight  and  it  is  to  be  understood  that  the 
out  Lands  Is  not  to  be  Sold  att  a  vandue  but  to  be  Sold  to  the  best  Chap  that  Said 
Committee  Can  find  and  that  the  uses  of  the  money  which  the  Above  Sd  Lands 
Shall  Fetch  Shall  be  Converted  to  the  use  of  the  School  in  Sd  Town  for  the  Said 
Term  of  Nine  Hundred  and  Ninety  Nine  years. 

[Signed]  Joseph  Lewis,  William  Judd,  Sam' '  Hikcox,  Committee. 

The  Above  "Written  Bill  was  past  into  a  Tote. 

The  sales  commenced  almost  immediately.  John  Bronson, 
Jr.,  bought  the  school  and  in  Bucks  Meadow  for  40s.  and  one 
penny  per  acre.  Tliree  and  a  lialf  acres  at  Long  Meadow- 
brought  £14, 13s.,  Xathan  Beard  being  the  purchaser.  Many 
parcels  of  divided  lands  not  taken  up  were  sold,  at  difterent 
times,  for  ten  shillings  an  acre.  The  money  obtained  from  the 
sale  of  these  lands  was  to  be  managed  by  the  school  commit- 
tee, who  were  to  put  it  out  at  interest,  "  taking  mortgage  se- 
curity from  time  to  time."  Dec.  11,  1738,  a  vote  was  passed 
to  associate  "  the  town  clerk  for  the  time  being  "  with  tlie 
committee  in  the  management  of  these  moneys.  At  the  same 
time  the  town  by  vote  directed  that  the  receipts  from  the  fund 
should  be  distributed  annuall}^  among  the  different  societies, 
accordino:  to  their  several  lists  of  estate. 


240 


IIISTOKY    OF   WATEEEUET. 


In  settling  the  claims  of  the  Hartford  and  Windsor  proprie- 
tors to  the  lands  in  Litchfield  County,  the  Colony  obtained  tlie 
quiet  possession  of  seven  townships  in  the  western  part  of  the 
County — Norfolk,  Goshen,  Canaan,  Cornwall,  Kent,  Salis- 
bury and  Sharon.  By  the  act  of  1733,  the  lands  in  these  town- 
ships were  to  be  sold  and  the  money  distributed  for  the  sup- 
port of  the  schools  in  the  Colony  : 

Viz,  those  schools  that  ought  to  be  kept  in  those  towns  that  are  now  settled, 
and  that  did  make  and  compute  lists  of  their  polls  and  ratable  estate  in  the  year 
last  past,  and  such  towns  shall  receive  said  money,  every  town  according  to  the 
proportion  of  said  Hst,  and  each  parish  to  receive  in  proportion  according  to  their 
own  list  given  in  as  aforesaid  the  last  year ;  all  which  money  shall  be  let  out,  and 
the  interest  thereof  improved  for  the  support  of  the  respective  schools  aforesaid 
forever,  and  to  no  other  use.     [Old  Statutes.] 

The  money  received  by  Waterbury  from  the  sale  of'  these 
"  Western  lands,"  so  called,  remained,  after  Westbury  and 
Northbury  were  set  off,  in  the  hands  of  the  old  society.  The 
latter  claimed,  with  some  plausibility,  that  the  new  parishes 
were  not  entitled  to  any  part  of  it,  and  declined  to  pay  over 
any  portion.  The  other  parties  contended  for  a  share,  the 
proportion  to  be  determined  by  lists  of  estate.  The  contro- 
versy w^axed  warm,  and  the  town  meetings  w^ere  agitated  by  it. 
In  December,  1741, 

There  having  been  considerable  discourse  about  the  money  coming  to  the 
town  for  which  the  western  lands  was  sold  and  granted  for  the  use  of  the  school, 
and  not  agreeing  in  what  method  it  should  be  disposed  of,  [the  town]  did  by 
vote  agree  that  they  would  refer  it  to  some  indifferent  gentlemen  to  be  decided  by 
them  where  the  said  money  shall  be  disposed  for  the  use  above  said,  whether  it 
belongs  to  the  first  parish,  or  should  be  divided  among  the  several  parishes,  ac- 
cording to  what  their  lists  show  in  1732. 

The  "  indifferent  gentlemen"  (who  were  named  by  vote) 
were  Col.  James  Wadsworth  and  Col.  Benjamin  Hall.  A  com- 
mittee w\as  appointed  to  wait  on  them,  consisting  of  Capt. 
Hopkins  and  Scrg.  Thomas  Porter,  (of  the  old  society,) 
Capt.  Hickox,  (of  Westbury,)  and  Dea.  Blakeslee,  (of  Nortli- 
bury.)  This  plan  of  settling  the  difficulty,  it  is  presumed, 
was  not  satisfactory  to  the  discontented  ]iarishes  ;  for,  it 
will  be  observed,  their  lists  were,  in  1732,  comparatively  small. 


r-^ 


n^A^/n/L 


J.  Jfelly  I'rinttr- . 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUET.  241 

Nor  is  it  probable   that   such  a  settlement,  though  mutually 
agreed  on,  would  have  been  final. 

In  ]751,  the  outside  societies,  now  comprehending  West- 
bury,  Northbury  and  the  part  of  Oxford  belonging  to  Water- 
bury,  secured  by  some  means  a  majority  of  votes,  in  town 
meeting,  and  in  December  of  that  year,  the  following  vote 
was  passed : 

It  was  voted  that  all  the  monies  giuen  to  the  sd  town  for  the  use  of  the  school 
in  said  town  that  said  town  drew  by  their  list  in  173'2,  upon  account  of  the  sale  of 
the  new  townships,  or  western  lands,  shall,  for  the  future,  be  divided  by  the  annu- 
al list  of  each  parish,  for  the  use  of  [the]  school  in  each  parish — and  that  A,  B 
and  C  be  a  committee  to  take  care  of  said  monies,  and  see  that  the  same  be  made 
use  of  according  to  the  law  in  that  case  made  and  provided.  And  if  either  of  said 
parishes  shall  neglect  to  keep  a  school  according  to  law,  then  said  committee  shall 
have  full  power  to  divide  the  said  monies  to  and  between  those  parishes  that  shall 
keep  their  school  as  aforesaid,  according  to  law ;  that  is  to  say  by  their  respective 
lists  as  aforesaid. 

The  committee  afterwards  named  to  stand  in  the  jdace  of 
A.,  B.  and  C.  were  Capt.  Samuel  llickox,  Daniel  Potter  and 
Joseph  Bronson.  At  the  same  time,  certain  individuals  belong- 
ing to  the  tirst  society,  to  wit,  Dea.  Thomas  Clark,  Doct.  Ben- 
jamin Warner,  Isaac  Bronson,  Eobert  Johnson,  James  Nichols, 
Lieut.  John  Scovill,  Samuel  Scott,  James  Porter,  Thomas  Bron- 
son, Jr.  and  Lieut.  Thomas  Porter,  protested  against  the  vote, 
and  desired  that  their  protest  might  be  entered  on  the 
records.  --. 

But  it  was  necessary  that  the  town's  committee  should  first     | 
get  control  of  the  money  in  dispute  which  was  now  in  the    / 
possession  of  the  school  couimittee  of  the  first  society/   A  vote 
was  therefore  passed,  which  is  as  follo"\\^r 

Whereas  the  first  society  in  sd  town  have  by  thoir  committee  taken  all  the 
monies  and  bonds  that  was  given  to  sd  town  for  the  use  of  a  school  in  sd  town 
as  aforesaid  into  their  possession,  and  used  the  same  i'or  the  school  of  said  society 
only,  for  some  years  past — It  is  therefore  at  this  same  meeting  voted  that  A,  B 
and  C  be  a  committee  in  the  behalf  of  said  town  to  make  a  lawful  demand  of  sd 
monies  and  bonds  of  the  said  school  committees  of  the  said  first  society,  and  upon 
receiving  of  the  same,  they,  the  said  A,  B  &  C,  are  hereby  impowered  to  change 
the  same  when  they  become  changeable  by  taking  said  bonds  and  notes  unto 
themselves  and  successors,  as  a  committee  for  said  town  for  the  time  being,  and 
for  want  of  said  committee,  to  the  select  men  of  said  town  for  the  time  being,  so  as 
said  monies  may  be  disposed  of  for  the  use  of  the  school[s]  of  said  town  as  afore- 
said, and  in  no  other  way. 

16 


2-i2  HISTOKY    OF   WATEEBUEY. 

X     The  subject,  however,  does  not  appear  to  have  been  final!}' 

/      disposed  of  by  the  preceding  action,  and  in  March,  1770,  it 

was  again  bronght  before  a  town  meeting.     A  vote  was  passed 

\       dechiring  that  thence  forward  the  moneys  derived  from  the  sale 

\      of  the  western  lands  should  be  forever  divided  among  the  several 

I     societies  and  parts  of  societies  of  the  town,  whether  then  in  ex- 

i     istence  or  which  might  be  bronght  into  existence,  according  to 

1    J:hejrsevcral  "  claims." 

This  vote  gave,  of  course,  great  dissatisfaction  to  the  first 
society,  and  the  school  committee  solemnly  protested  against  it, 
as  follows : 

Whereas  the  Hon.  General  Assembly  [&c.]  granted  certain  moneys  [&c.]  to  the 
first  society  in  Waterbury  for  the  use  of  the  schools  in  said  first  society  forever* 
-^— And  whereas  the  inhabitants,  [&c.]  convened  in  town  meeting,  have  voted  [&c.] 
contrary  to  the  laws  of  the  colony — 

Therefore,  we  the  subscribers,  school  committee  in  sd  first  society,  do  enter  this 
our  protest  against  sdvote  as  being  unlawful,  inequitable  and  injurious  to  posterity 
— and  request  that  the  same  may  be  recorded. — Dated  this  12th  day  of  March  A. 
D.  1*770. 

[Signed]  Jonathan  Baldwin,  Isaac  Bronson,  Jr.,  Ezra  Bronson,  Keuben  Blakes- 
lee,  committee  of  the  first  society  of  Waterbury. 

Also  Mr.  Isaac  Bronson  protested  against  the  sd  vote  and  desired  the  same 
might  be  recorded. 

When  the  new  societies  came  to  be  made  independent 
towns,  the  disputes  concerning  the  school  and  ministerial 
moneys 'were  renewed,  the  old  town  setting  up  an  exclusive 
claim.     Controversy,  law-suits,  derangements  of  the  currency 

,       and  bad  management  finally  settled  all  questions  by  dissipating 

1      all  the  moneys. 


*  This,  it  will  be  noticed,  is  not  the  language  of  the  law  that  made  the  grant. 


HISTORY    OF   "WATERBURY.  243 


CHAPTER    XVL 


POPULATIOX  INCREASES  :   BDIIGEATIOX. 

Previous  to  1710,  but  a  single  addition  liad  been  made  to 
tlie  j)opnlation  of  Waterbuiy  from  foreign  sources — that  of 
Joseph  Lewis.  AboutlTlO,  or  soon  after,  Thomas  Clark  join- 
ed  the  settlement.  In  1711,  Zachariah  Baldwin  from  Milfoi-d, 
made  hTs^appearance,  and  was  accepted  as  a  £40  proprietor. 
In  about  two  years,  however,  his  courage  had  all  oozed  out. 
lie  sold  everything,  including  "  building  and  other  timber," 
and  slipped  away  quietly.  With  these  three  exceptions,  there 
were  no  accessions  of  settlers,  or  intended  settlers,  from  other 
towns,  till  after  1720.  The  peace  of  1713,  however,  had 
brought  comparative  quietness  and  security,  and  was  followed 
by  brighter  pros]>ects^\  Removals  became  less  frequent.  The 
young  men  who  had  given  so  much  trouble  were  with  less 
difficulty  constrained  to  settle  around  the  family  homestead. 
Some  of  those  who  had  quit  in  the  darker  days  of  the  settle- 
ment, returned.  Such  was  the  fact  with  Dr.  Ephraim  Warner, 
William  Judd,  Moses  Bronson,  Dr.  John  Warner  and  a  few 
others.  There  was  a  moderate  accession  to  the  population 
from  natural  increase.  !^-evious  to_rr20^nuch  the  greatest 
proportion  of  the  inhabitants  lived  in  or  near  the  town  center. 
A  few  families,  considerably  less  than  a  dozen  in  all,  probabl}^, 
had  settled  at  Buckshill,  Judd's  Meadow  and  Breakneck.  The 
remainder  of  the  town  was^jtill  a  wilderness.  From  1690  to 
1713,  the  taxable  list  in  thejown  varied  from  £1,554  in  1694 
to  £2,415  in  1712.  In  1713  it  was  £2,154  and  in  1720  £2,757. 
Probably  the  population  had  not  increased  in  proportion,  at 
the  last  date. 

The  first  new  name  that  appears  on  the  town  records,  after 
1720,  was  that  of  Gershom  Fulford,  son  of  Abraham,  of 
Woodbury.  He  was  admitted  an  inhabitant,  Feb.  28,  1721-2, 
and  received  ^  grant  of  "  eight  acres  of  land  in  the  seques- 
tered land,"  He  entered  into  covenant  with  the  town,  as 
follows : 


244  HISTORY    OF   WATERBIJRY. 

We  the  subscribers  do  covenant  to  and  with  Gershom  Fulford  that  if  the  abore 
sd  Fulford  do  come  and  cohabit  in  the  above  said  town  as  our  blacksmith  and  prac- 
tice his  trade  among  us  for  the  term  of  seven  years  next  after  the  date  above  said 
and  perform  articles  as  our  bachelors  have  done,  that  then  the  land  given  by  sub- 
scription and  by  vote  to  be  his  own  and  his  heirs  forever — And  if  the  sd  Fulford 
do  fail  of  this  obligation,  then  the  land  given  to  him  by  subscription  to  return  to 
the  subscribers — We  say  this  land  to  be  taken  up  in  the  undivided  land. 

Daniel  Porter,     )  ^      ,        t^  ir     i 
Samuel  Hickox.  r'^^-^^^^"^^"!^"^-'^- 

Fulford  succeeded  Dea.  Judd,  (now  somewhat  advanced  in 
life,)  and  was  the  second  blacksmith  of  the  town.  In  process 
of  time,  he  was  rais^ed  to  the  dignity  of  town  brander.  He 
had  a  large  family  and  died  in  AVatertown  in  1790,  aged  90. 

James  Brown  was  one  of  the  patentees  named  in  the  town 
'  j^ateivUjf  1720  ;  but  he  was  not  then  a  resident  of  the  place. 
He  was,  however,  "of  Waterbury"  in  Sept.  1722,  and  was,  so 
^j^r  as  can  be  ascertained,  the  fourth  addition  tojhe  permanent 
popiilationjjf  Jthe_fown,~Ti'^^  ontsMe^gnrces^after  1700.  He 
wasthe  second  individual  (Fulford  being  the  tirst)1rQm^al]iroad 
not^  proprietor  by  grant,  who  becaine-a  settler.  His  wife  was 
Elizabeth  Kirby,  by  whom  he  had  eight  children  born  in  New 
Haven  and  two  born  in  Waterbury.  He  settled  on  the  'New 
Haven  road  east  of  Judd's  Meadow  and  was  licensed  by  the 
County  Court  as  a  tavern  keeper  ;  but  soldout  inl737to  Josiali 
Terrel  of  Milford,  removed  to  Westbury,  and  resided  on  what 
is  now  known  as  the  "  Buckingham  place."  He  is  memorable 
as  being  the  first  Churchman  of  Waterbury,  and  was  in  deris- 
ion called  Bishop  Brown.  His  death  took  place  in  1760,  at 
the  age  of  seventy-five.     In  1722  he  wrote  by  proxy. 

The  next  permanent  settler  of  Waterbury*  appears  to  have 
been  Kathaniel  Arnold,  Sen.,  of  Hartford.  He  was  appointed 
grand  juror  in  Dec.  1723,  and  at  the  same  time  received  a 
grant  from  the  town  of  ten  acres  of  land  on  David's  Brook,  on 
condition  that  he  should  abide  in  the  town  four  years.  He 
married  the  widow  (and  his  son  Nathaniel,  born  in  1704,  the 
daughter)  of  John  Richason,  deceased.  He  lived  on  the 
north  side  of  West  Main  street,  near  where  William  R.  Hitch- 


*  Samuel  Chidester  (so  written)    appears  to   have  settled  in  the  south   part   of  the  town 
1722,  but  he  disappeared  about  1726,  after  having  sold  land  to  James  Brown. 


HISTORY    OF   AVATEEBUKY.  245 

cock  now  resides.  He  afterwards  removed  to  Westbury, 
where  lie  died  Sept.  ]  3,  1753.  His  son,  Capt,  Nathaniel  Ar- 
nold, settled  at  Wooster  Swamp,  had  a  larm  there,  and  died 
May  12, 1777. 

AVilliam  Ludington,  of  East  Hay  en,  and  John  Williams,  a 
clothier,  had  grants  of  sequestered  land  about  the  same  time 
as  Arnold,  and  on  similar  conditions.  I  suppose  Ludington 
became  a  resident  of  tlie  town,  and  thus  secured  bis  grant  of 
"  eight  acres  in  the  sequestered  laud  ;"  but  I  baye  yet  discov- 
ered no  traces  of  him  after  tlie  grant,  till  1738,  when  he,  or 
one  bearing  his  name,  was  living  in  ISTorthburj,  (afterwards 
so  called.)  I  find  no  proof  that  John  AVilliams,  a  clothier, 
accepted  the  ofler  of  the  town,  or  became  an  inhabitant  at  all. 

After  this,  it  does  not  seem  to  have  been  necessary  to  en- 
courage immigration  by  land  grants  or  other  rewards.  Popu- 
lation flowed  in  spontaneously  and  with  considerable  rapidity. 
Names  yet  unheard  of  multiply  upon  the  records.  A  large 
proportion  of  tlie  new  comers  "  located "  themselves  in  the 
northwest  and  north  parts  of  the  town,  (Watertown  and  Plym- 
outh,) these  sections,  till  now  having  been  entirely  neglected. 
They  came  from  various  towns  in  the  State,  Milford,  New 
Haven,  (including  North  Haven  and  West  Haven,)  Derby, 
Woodbury,  Wallingford,  Branford,  Wethersfield,  &c.,  but 
more  were  from  Milford  than  from  any  other  place.  James 
Blakeslee  (at  first  written  Blachly)  came  from  West  Haven, 
(then  a  parish  of  New  Haven,)  in  1723.*  He  lived  on  the 
corner  of  East  and  North  Main  streets,  but  in  1733  sold  out  to 
Stephen  Sanford  of  Milford,  and  bought  of  the  heirs  of  David 
Scott,  a  house  and  three  acres  of  land  on  the  south  side  of 
''  Centre  Square,"  next  west  of  Dea.  Clark's.  Isaac  Castle, 
Joseph  Hurlbut  and  Samuel  Thomas  came  from  Woodbury, 
and  settled  at  Wooster  Swamp  in  1725.  Jonathan  Prindle, 
'•  son  of  Eleazer  of  Milford, "f  settled  in  the  same  neighbor- 
hood in   1727.     Nathan  Prindle,  from   Newton,  a   clothier, 


*  This  date  and  those  which  follow,  refer  to  the  time  when  the  individuals  named  are  first 
met  with  as  inhabitants  of  Waterbury. 

t  So  says  the  Waterbury  marriage  record.  Rev.  A.  B.  Chapin,  in  his  Sermon  on  the  early 
Churchmen  of  Connecticut,  lS39,says  that  Jonathan  Prindle  of  Waterbury  was  of  West  Ha- 
ven.   He  may  have  been  originally  so. 


246  HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKY. 

liad  a  grant  of  two  acres  of  land  np  Great  Brook,  in  Jan. 
1Y27-S,  provided  lie  would  build  a  fulling  mill  in  fonr  years. 
He  was  a  resident  of  the  town  at  that  date.  He  sold  out  his 
house  and  mill  in  1737,  to  [Nathaniel  Arnold. 

Jonathan,  Stephen  and  Ebenezer  Kelsey  were  sons  of 
Stephen  Kelsey  of  Wethersfield  and  grandsons  of  John  Bron- 
son  1st  of  Waterbmy.  Jonathan  came  as  early  as  1725 ; 
Stephen  in  1727  and  Ebenezer  before  1732.  Jonathan  moved 
to  Bethlehem,  then  a  part  of  Woodlniry,  about  1735  or  1736 
where  he  became  a  deacon. 

James  Baldwin,  from  Xewark,  K",  J.,  settled  at  Judd's 
Meadow  in  1727.  He  lived  on  Fulling  Mill  Brook  in  1710, 
where  he  owned  a  grist  mill,  and  died  in  Derby.  John  John- 
son of  Derby  settled  at  Judd's  Meadow  about  the  same  time  as 
Baldwin.  His  son  Silence  is  first  mentioned  seven  years  later. 
James  Johnson  was  in  Waterbury  as  early  as  1727.  Joseph 
Smith  of  Derby  came  in  1727.  l^athan  Beard  of  Stratford  set- 
tled in  "Waterbury  about  1728,  and  lived  on  the  west  side  of 
Willow  street,  a  few  rods  above  Grove.  Henry  Cook  was  ad- 
mitted an  inhabitant  in  Jan.  1728-9.  James  Williams  of  Hart- 
ford and  Wallingford  became  a  resident  of  the  town  in  1729  ; 
bought  a  house  and  some  land  in  that  year  near  the  road  to 
Scott's  Mountain  on  Steel's  Brook;  built  a  corn  mill  and  saw 
mill  near  where  the  factory  of  the  Oakville  Co.  stands,  the  corn 
mill  being  in  the  boundary  line  which  was  afterwards  drawn 
between  Westbury  and  Waterbury.  In  1739,  he  sold  his 
house  and  half  the  mills  to  Stephen  Welton,  son  of  George. 
Robert  Johnson,  a  shoemaker  and  tanner,  came  in  1729  and 
settled  on  Burnt  Hill.  Ephraim  Bissell  of  Tolland  first  ap- 
peared in  Jan.  1728-9,  wdien  he  was  admitted  an  inhabitant. 
John  Sutliff  settled  in  the  northwest  quarter  near  the  river,  in 
1730.  Nathaniel  Merrel  of  Hartford  became  a  settler  in  1730. 
Abraham  Utter  came  from  New  Haven  in  1730,  and  Avas  liv- 
ing near  Scott's  Mountain  in  1735.  Jonathan  Garnsey  of  Mil- 
ford  bought  Stephen  Hopkins'  place,  in  Dec.  1729,  which  he 
exchanged  with  Tliomas  Barnes  in  1735.  He  finally  removed 
to  Westbury  and  settled  in  the  part  called  Garnseytown.  He 
became  a  deacon  of  the  Westbury  Church  and  died  June  14, 
1776.      John  Garnsey,  also  of  Milford,  came  several  years 


HISTORY   OF   AVATERBURY.  247 

later,  appearing  first  at  Wooster  and  then  in  Nortlibury. 
Calelj  Tlionison  of  'New  Haven  settled  in  the  southwest  part 
of  the  town.  He  was  admitted  an  inhabitant*  in  Dec.  1730. 
Ebenezer  Hopkins,  Stephen  Hopkins  and  Isaac  Hopkins, 
brothers,  came  from  Hartford.  They  were  nephews  of  John 
Hopkins,  1st,  of  Waterbnrj,  and  sons  probably  of  Ebenezer. 
They  all  settled  in  Waterbnry  about  1730.  Isaac  died  in  Wol- 
cott  in  1805,  aged  96.  Joseph  Nichols  had  lived  on  Long 
Island,  but  came  to  Waterbury  from  Derby.  He  settled  at 
Wooster  as  early  as  1730,  and  died  1733.  Samuel  Towner, 
Dea.  Samuel  Brown  and  Elnatlian  Taylor  (the  last  from  North 
Haven)  settled  in  the  northwest  quarter  about  1731.  James 
Hull  and  John  Alcock  from  New  Haven,  Ebenezer  Blakeslee 
of  North  Haven,  and  Joseph  Gillet  were  admitted  inhabitants 
in  Dec.  1731.  Thomas  Blakeslee  of  New  Haven  settled  in  the 
northwest  quarter,  near  the  river,  with  a  family,  in  1731  or  1732. 
Moses  and  Jacob  Blakeslee  appeared  several  years  later. 
Ebenezer  Elwell  of  Branford  settled  in  Northbury  about  1732 
and  died  in  1757.  Joseph  Lathrop  of  Norwich  settled  in  West- 
bury  (?)  about  1732,  had  five  children  born  in  Waterbury,  and 
returned  to  Norwich  after  1745.  Jonathan  Baldwin  came  from 
Milford  in  1733.  He  and  his  son  Jonathan  were  both  leading 
men  of  our  town.  James  Prichard  from  Milford  settled  in 
Waterbury  in  1733,  and  died  in  1749.  Daniel  Curtis  from 
Wallingford  came  to  Waterbury  about  1733  and  settled  in 
Northbury.  Samuel,  James,  Ebenezer  and  Jesse  Curtis  ap- 
peared at  later  dates.  Nathaniel  Gunn  of  Derby  settled  in 
the  southwest  quarter  (Guntown)  in  1734,  and  had  ten  chil- 
dren, seven  of  them  born  in  Waterbury. 

At  still  later  periods  came  the  Foots  from  Branford ;  the 
Woosters  and  Weeds  from  Derby;  the  Fords,  Hotchkisses, 
Frosts,  Royces,  and  later  Cooks,  from  Wallingford  ;  the 
Todds,  Ilumastons,  Tuttles  and  Potters,  from  North  Haven ; 
the  Reynoldses  from  Coventry  ;  the  Roots  from  Farmington  ; 
the  Camps  and  Fenns  from  Milford. 

*  There  was  a  law  of  the  Colony  made  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  the  people  against 
"  persons  of  an  ungoverned  conversation,"  who  might  prove  "vicious,  chargeable  and  burthen- 
some  to  tlie  places  where  they  come,"  requiring  that  all  persons  before  they  could  become  in- 
habitants should  be  accepted  by  a  major  vote  of  the  town.  A  few  only  of  those  admitted  in  Wa- 
terbury are  recorded. 


I 


248  HISTOEY    OF   WATERBUKY. 

By  means  of  additions  from  without  and  the  natural  increase 
from  within,  the  population  of  Waterbnry  rapidly  augmented 
after  about  1724.  According  to  my  estimate,  there  were,  in 
1727,  over  three  hundred  souls  ;  in  1734,  nearly  five  hundred  ; 
in  1737,  about  nine  hundred,  and  in  1749,  about  fifteen  hun- 
dred. The  first  enumeration  was  in  1756,  when  tliere  were 
1,829;  the  next  in  1774,  when  there  were  3,536. 

There  is  in  the  old  town  book  a  list  of  the  freemen  of  Wa- 
terbnry, which,  to  those  not  familiar  with  the  names,  is  of  but 
little  value,  owing  to  the  omission  of  dates.  The  qualifica- 
tions of  a  freeman  were  "  a  quiet  and  peaceable  behaviour  and 
civil  conversation,"  twenty-one  years  of  age,  and  a  freehold 
estate  of  the  value  of  forty  shillings  per  annum,  or  forty 
pounds  personal  estate.  The  list  referred  to  is,  in  its  com- 
mencement, in  the  handwriting  of  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.  His 
catalogue  contains  twenty-seven  names,  and  bears  internal  ev- 
idence of  having  been  made  out  between  1698  and  1702.  The 
persons  named  may  be  regarded  as  the  freemen  of  AYaterbury 
between  those  dates  and  afterwards.  Whenever  a  person  died 
or  removed  from  the  town,  his  name  was  crossed  with  a  pen. 

To  this  list  of  twenty-seven  freemen,  were  added  by  the 
hand  of  Dea.  Thomas  Judd  the  names  of  seven  persons,  made 
freemen  doubtless  while  he  was  town  clerk,  from  1709  to  1712. 
Then  six  names  are  scrawled  by  John  Judd  when  he  was  reg- 
ister, between  Dec.  1713  and  Dec.  1717.  Then  William 
Judd's  record  commences.  He  held  ofiice  four  years  and  du- 
ring the  time,  (no  date  being  given,)  made  up  a  new  roll.  Four 
only  of  the  names  which  are  entered  by  him  are  new. 

I  give  below  the  lists  of  the  four  successive  clerks,  omitting 
from  the  last,  or  William  Judd's  catalogue,  all  except  the  four 
new  names : 

Ensign  Timothy  Stanley,  John  Welton,  Sen.,  Dea.  Thomas  Judd,  Thomas  Judd, 
Jr.,  Benjamin  Barnes,  Serg.  Isaac  Bronson,  Joseph  Gaylord,  Sen.,  Abraham  An- 
druss,  Sen.,  John  Hopkins,  Stephen  Upson,  Edmund  Scott,  John  Scovill,  John 
Richards,  Isaac  Bronson,  Jr.,  David  Scott,  John  Judd,  John  Bronson,  Samuel 
Hickox,  George  Scott,  Thomas  Richason,  John  Richason,  Ephraim  Warner,  Jo- 
seph Gaylord,  Jr.,  Samuel  Stanley,  Stephen  Welton,  John  Warner,  Sen.,  Obadiah 
Richards. 

Wilham  Hickox,  Joseph  Lewis,  Daniel  Warner,  Jonathan  Scott,  Richard  Welton, 
Thomas  Richards,  Daniel  Porter,  Jr. 

Thomas  Clark,  Thomas  Hickox,  Thomas  Barnes,  Jeremiah  Peck,  Stephen  Up- 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURT.  249 

son,  Jr.,  "William  Judd,  Sen.,  [son  of  Philip,  sometimes  called  "  William  Judd, 
tailor."] 

William  Judd,  [the  clerk,]  Thomas  Bronson,  Stephen  Hopkins,  Ebenezer 
Bronson. 

[Mr.  Southma^vd  was  chosen  register  in  Dec.  1721,  and  he  seems  to  have  added, 
from  time  to  time,  (without  date  again,)  the  names  of  other  freemen  as  they  were 
admitted.] 

Obadiah  Scott,  Timothy  Hopkins,  Benjamin  Warner,  George  Welton,  Nathaniel 
Arnold,  John  Southmayd,  Samuel  Porter,  Samuel  Hickox,  Ebenezer  Hickox, 
Samuel  Barnes,  Thomas  Richards,  Jr.,  John  Scorill,  Joseph  Smith,  Thomas 
Andruss,  Thomas  Upson,  John  Upson,  Jonathan  Prindle,  Thomas  Hickox,  John 
Barnes,  Ebenezer  Richason,  William  Scott,  Samuel  Scott,  Jr.,  James  Porter, 
Thomas  Porter,  Richard  Welton,  Jr.,  Obadiah  Warner,  Doct.  John  Warner,  John 
Judd,  John  Bronson,  Joseph  Prime,  Nathaniel  Arnold,  Jr.,  Henry  Cook,  John 
Andruss,  William  Scovill,  James  Baldwin,  John  Warner,  son  of  Ephraim,  David 
Scott,  Joseph  Judd,  James  Blakeslee,  Stephen  Kelsey,  Daniel  Porter,  Gershom 
Scott,  Gershom  Fulford,  James  Johnson,  Edmund  Scott,  son  of  George,  Stephen 
Hopkins,  Jonathan  Garnsey,  James  Hull,  Elienezer  Warner,  Daniel  Williams, 
Moses  Bronson,  Samuel  Thomas,  Thomas  Judd,  Jr.,  Samuel  Camp,  Jonathan 
Kelsey,  Jonathan  Scott,  Jr.,  Samuel  Scott,  Sen.,  Obadiah  Richards,  Joseph  Lewis, 
Jr.,  James  Williams,  James  Prichard,  Daniel  How,  Joseph  Judd,  Isaac  Hopkins, 
Samuel  Warner,  son  of  Daniel,  Stephen  Welton,  Samuel  Judd,  Joseph  Hurlbut, 
Eleazer  Scott,  Ebenezer  Warner,  son  of  Ephraim,  Jonathan  Scott,  son  of  Ed- 
mund, John  Alcock,  Jonathan  Baldwin,  Timothy  Porter,  Nathan  Beard,  Caleb 
Thompson,  Obadiah  Scott,  son  of  David,  Isaac  Bronson,  Jr.,  Edward  Scovill, 
Stephen  Scott,  Joseph  Weed,  James  Nichols,  Thomas  Bronson,  Jr.,  Thomas  Mat- 
thews, Mr.  Mark  Leavenworth,  Mr.  John  Trumbull,  Jonas  Weed,  John  Southmayd, 
Jr.,  Caleb  Clark,  Edmund  Thompkins,  Jonathan  Foot,  Timothy  Judd,  Stephen 
Judd,  Ebenezer  Wakhn,  Ebenezer  Richards,  George  Nichols,  Benjamin  Bronson, 
Gideon  Hotchkiss,  Jacob  Blakeslee,  Robert  Johnson,  Stephen  Welton,  Jr.,  Joshua 
Porter,  John  Richason,  Samuel  Hickox,  William  Adams,  Peter  Welton,  Silas 
Johnson,  Josiah  Bronson,  Nathan  Prindle,  Abijah  Richards,  Zebulon  Scott,  Abra- 
ham Warner,  Mr.  Samuel  Todd,  Daniel  Southmayd,  Thomas  Lewis,  John  Garnsey, 
John  Warner,  Jr.,  Ebenezer  Porter,  Samuel  Reynolds,  Abel  Sutliflf,  John  Weed, 
Samuel  Lewis,  Nathan  Hubbard,  Richard  Seymour,  James  Bellamy,  Ebenezer 
Baldwin,  Ebenezer  Trumbull,  Caleb  Humaston,  Andrew  Weed,  Abel  Doolittle, 
Roger  Prichard,  Jr.,  Abraham  Andruss,  Josiah  Warner. 

[At  this  point  Mr.  Southmayd  commences  by  giving  dates,  thus  :]  Freemen 
made  April  11,  1748 — Andrew  Bronson,  Moses  Terrell,  Joseph  Osborn,  Benja- 
min Matthews,  Jonathan  Cook,  Samuel  Root,  John  Rew,  Thomas  Doolittle,  Ste- 
phen Matthews,  Samuel  Darwin.  April  10,  1749,  James  Prichard,  Jr.,  David 
Humaston,  Abel  Camp,  Joseph  Upson,  Elam  Brown,  Daniel  Potter,  Enoch  Scott, 
Moses  Cook,  William  Hickox,  Abraham  Hickox,  Thomas  Upson,  Joseph  Brown, 
Asahel  Castle,  Thomas  Cole,  Thomas  Richards,  Jr.,Elnathan  Judd,  Stephen  Upson, 
Jr.,  Moses  Blakeslee,  3d,  John  Blakeslee.  April  8,  1751,  Solomon  Moss,  Samuel 
Porter.  Sept.  17,  1751,  John  Brown,  Joseph  Sutliif,  Isaac  Judd,  Bartholomew  Ja- 
cobs, Aaron  Harrison,  Zachariah  Sanford.  April  13, 1752,  Eliakim  Welton,  Thomas 
Welton,  Jr.,  Ebenezer  Ford,  Reuben  Blakeslee. 


250  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 


CHAPTER    XYII. 


THE  SETTLEMENT  EXTENDS:  NEW  SOCIETIES. 

Before  1700,  all  the  people  of  Waterbniy  lived  in  tlie  town 
center  or  its  immediate  neighborliood.  The  house  most  dis- 
tant from  the  meeting  house  was,  I  believe,  Daniel  Warner's, 
(supposed  to  have  been  built  before  1~00,)  situated  on  the 
north  side  of  the  Farmington  road,  a  little  east  of  the  dwelling- 
marked  on  the  map  J.  H.  Sandland.  Soon  after  the  above 
date,  the  thoughts  of  the  planters  were  turned  to  the  more  dis- 
tant jDarts  of  the  town. 

The  first  permanent  settlement  beyond  the  neighborhood  of 
the  old  village  appears  to  have  been  made  at  Judd's  Meadow.* 
The  lands  here  were  taken  up  and  improved  earlier  than  any 
other  which  Avere  so  far  removed  from  the  town  center.  The 
first  settlers  were  Samuel  Hickox,  Daniel  Warner  and  Joseph 
Lewis.  Hickox  "located"  himself  on  Fulling  Mill  Brookj 
where  he  had  already  built  a  house,  Dec.  21,  1702.  Here 
about  1709  he  erected  a  fulling  mill,  which  gave  its  name  to 
the  stream.  His  sons,  Ebenezer  and  Gideon,  settled  in  the  same 
neighborhood.  Daniel  Warner  is  believed  to  have  removed 
to  Judd's  Meadow  a  little  later  than  Hickox,  say  about  1705. 
In  that  year  he  sold  his  house  east  of  the  village.  He  took  up 
his  residence  near  Hickox,  on  the  brook,  which  was  some- 
times called  Daniel  Warner's  Brook.  His  house  is  alluded  to 
Aug.  1708.  His  sons,  Samuel,  Ebenezer,  and  Abraham,  re- 
mained in  the  south  part  of  the  town.  Joseph  Lewis  settled 
on  the  west  side  of  the  river  below  the  present  bridge,  and 
owned  much  land  there  which  extended  fer  to  the  south. 
There  are  no  facts  which  show  the  exact  time  of  his  settlement. 


*  This  name  is  first  used  in  tlie  Indian  deed  of  lCSl-5.  It  came,  doubtless,  from  Lieut.  Tliomas 
Judd,  who  owned  lands  there  at  a  very  early  date.  It  was  first  applied  to  the  meadows  upon 
the  river,  but  afterwasds,  the  whole  southern  section  of  the  town  was  thus  designated. 


HISTORY   OF   WATEKBUKY.  251 

It  may  liave  been  soon  after  his  marriage  in  1703,  and  may 
have  been  not  till  several  years  later. 

Those  who  next  established  themselves  at  Judd's  Meadow, 
(all  I  believe  after  1714,)  were  John  Barnes,  Thomas  Richards, 
Obadiah  Scott,  Samuel  Warner,  Ebenezer  Richason,  James 
Brown  of  West  Haven,  Samnel  Barnes,  John  Andrnss,  Samuel 
and  Edmund  Scott,  sons  of  Edmund,  Stephen  Hopkins  and 
Thomas  Matthews.  Several  came  over  the  line  from  Derby, 
and  settled  near  the  southwest  Ijounds — the  Johnsons,  the 
Gunns  and  the  Weeds. 

Buckshill  was  first  settled  about  1703,  by  John  Warner,  (af- 
terwards of  Westbury,)  Joseph  Gaylord,  Jr.  and  John  Gay- 
lord.  The  Gaylords  soon  removed.  In  1708,  Richard  Wel- 
ton  bought  the  house  of  Joseph  Gaylord,  Jr.,  and  became  a 
permanent  settler.  He  lived  next  to  John  Warner,  on  the 
south.  The  latter,  after  several  years,  removed.  When  Dr. 
Ephraim  Warner  returned  from  AVoodbury,  about  1715,  he 
seems  to  have  gone  to  Buckshill.  Several  of  his  sons  remained 
there,  while  he,  after  a  few  years,  came  down  to  the  village  to 
live.  I  find,  in  1729,  the  following  persons  with  families  liv- 
ing on  Buckshill — Serg.  Richard  Welton,  Richard  Welton,  Jr., 
Benjamin  Warner,  John  Warner,  (afterwards  of  Korthbury,) 
Obadiah  Warner,  Joseph  Judd,  William  Scott,  Obadiah  Scott, 
Edmund  Scott  ?  son  of  George,  John  Welton  ? 

Bjxnikncck  Hill  is  S])oken  of  on  tlic  town  records  as  early  as 
IGSS.  Whencecame  tlie  name  I  know  noL  llarberin  his  11  is- 
twTcal  Collections,  and  Cothren  in  his  History  of  Woodbury, 
are  mistaken  in  their  accounts  of  its  origin.  The  name  first 
given  to  the  hill  was  in  a  little  time  applied  to  all  that  part 
of  the  town  in  which  it  is  situated. 

Isaac  Bronson,  Sen.,  owned  land  at  Breakneck  at  an  early 
period,  and  had  built  a  house  there  before  April,  1702.  Joseph 
Gaylord  and  John  Bronson  may  have  lived  there  temporarily ; 
but  the  first  permanent  settler  was  Isaac  Bronson,  eldest  son 
of  Isaac.  He  became  a  resident  at  Breakneck  Hill  probably 
as  early  as  1701  or  1705,  certainly  before  March  27,  1707, 
when  his  oldest  son  Isaac  was  born. 

The  first  house  which  was  erected  in  the  northwest  section 
of  the  town  appears  to  have  been  built  near  what  was  after- 
wards called  "  the  village,"  about  1701,  by  John  and  Obadiah 


252  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

Richards,  sons  of  Obadiali.  The  Indian  disturbances  at  that 
period  probably  prevented  its  permanent  occupation.  "Rich" 
ards'  house  "  and  the  buiklings  are  occasionally  referred  to  in 
the  laying  out  and  conveying  of  land.  In  April,  1701,  Abra- 
ham Andruss  sold  two  acres  on  a  hill  westerly  from  Richards's 
land,  where  their  house  and  barn  is  west  of  Wooster 
Swamp."     The  house  is  again  mentioned  in  1709. 

"  The  village,"  (so  called,)  mentioned  in  the  last  paragraph, 
was  a  tract  of  land  in  the  northwest  corner  of  the  town,  bor- 
dering on  Woodbury  and  Litchfield,  the  fertility  of  which  had 
been  discovered  at  an  early  period,  and  which  at  an  unknown 
date  had  been  sequestered  to  prevent  its  being  taken  up  in  the 
ordinary  land  divisions.  In  Kov.  1722,  the  proprietors  agreed 
to  have  a  division  of  this  sequestered  land.  At  the  same 
time,  land  was  reserved  for  roads,  and  provision  made  for  a 
village.     I  copy  from  the  record : 

It  was  agreed  by  vote  that  in  dividing  of  the  sequestered  land  at  the  North 
West  corner  there  shall  be  three  tears  of  Lotts,  viz,  a  highway  next  Woodbury  of 
Two  Rods  wide,  and  then  half  a  mile  wide  of  Land  to  be  laid  out  in  lotts  and  then 
a  highway  of  eight  rods  to  run  north  and  south,  and  then  another  tear  of  half  a 
mile  wide  and  then  a  nother  highway  of  eight  rods,  and  then  a  nother  tear  of  lotts 
a  half  a  mile  wide  and  then  a  highway  ou  the  east  side  of  eight  rods,  [&c.]  and  the 
Committe  in  laying  out  the  lotts  to  leave  a  four  or  six  rod  highway  every  half 
mile  or  there  abouts  through  the  tears,  no  lott  to  be  divided. 

Several  divisions  were  afterwards  made  of  the  village  lands, 
but  no  settlement  seems  to  have  been  begun  there  for  some 
time.  They  were  regarded  as  so  much  more  valuable  than 
the  other  undivided  lands  that,  in  some  of  the  divisions,  one 
acre  was  to  be  equal  to  five  acres,  (or  at  a  later  period,  to  two 
and  a  half  acres,)  in  the  other  parts  of  the  town.  The  "  vil- 
lage" is  now  called  Garnseytown,  from  the  name  of  its  early 
settlers,  Jonathan  Garnsey  and  his  sons  and  John  Garnsey. 

No  permanent  settlement  seems  to  have  been  made  in  the 
northwest  quarter  till  after  1720,  when  the  superior  agricultu- 
ral capabilities  of  that  section  became  more  fully  known.  The 
first  permanent  settlers  were,  apparently,  Jonathan  Scott, 
Sen.,  (he  who  was  taken  captive  by  the  Indians,)  and  Ebene- 
zer  Richason,  son  of  Thomas.  Scott  (and  his  sons)  lived  on 
Scott's  Mountain,  and  Richason  on  the  road  leading  to  the 
Mountain  and  near  to  it  and  to  Steel's  Brook,  on  the  southwest 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURT.  253 

side  of  the  latter,  (the  old  Buckingliam  place  ?)  1Y21  may  be 
named  as  the  probable  date  of  their  settlement.  Richason's 
house  is  first  spoken  of  June  22,  1721.  Afterwards,  (1736,)  I 
find  him  with  the  Northbury  people  and  soon  after  in  the 
sonthwest  quarter.  In  1750,  he  lived  on  the  Woodbury  road. 
In  1724,  or  perhaps  in  1723,  Dr.  John  Warner*  (afterwards 
deacon)  took  up  his  residence  on  or  near  Steel's  Brook  and 
the  road  leading  to  Scott's  Mountain  and  Wooster  Swamp. 
Isaac  Castle,  Samuel  Thomas  and  Joseph  Hnrlbut,  all  of  Wood- 
bury, sons-in-law,  the  two  first  of  John  Warner,  and  the  last 
of  Jonathan  Scott,  Sen.,  settled  at  Wooster  Swamp  about 
1725.  Jonathan  Kelsey  made  his  appearance  about  the  same 
time.  Afterwards  came  George  Welton,  (about  1726,)  David 
Scott  and  James  Williams,  the  last  from  Hartford. 

Besides  the  individuals  wliose  names  are  mentioned  above, 
there  were  settled  at  "  Wooster,"  (as  the  northwest  part  of  the 
town  was  sometimes  called,)  in  Dec.  1730,  the  following  per- 
sons, having  families,  to  wit :  Jonathan  Scott,  Jr.,  and  Ger- 
shom  Scott,  sons  of  Jonathan,  Ebenezer  Warner,  son  of  John, 
Joseph  Nichols,  Abraham  Utter,  John  Sutlift'  and  Henry 
Cook,  seventeen  in  all,  or  fifteen  besides  Sutlifi"  and  Cook,  who 
were  not  finally  included  in  the  society  of  Westbury.  The 
fifteen  all  lived  in  the  eastern  and  northern  j)arts  of  the  future 
l^arish,  particulary  along  Steel's  Brook  and  at  Wooster 
Swamp.  As  early  as  Nov.  1727,  a  highway  had  been  laid  out 
for  their  convenience  up  the  brook  and  so  to  the  "  village," 
which  was  afterwards  continued  to  Litchfield.  Hitherto,  one 
half  the  settlers  had  been  from  other  towns,  and  nearly  the 
same  proportion  was  continued  in  the  years  which  immediate- 
ly followed.  After  1730,  the  population  increased  rapidly 
and  spread  in  every  direction.  Tlie  people  had  become  so 
numerous  in  1732,  and  were  so  incommoded  in  attending 
meeting,  that  they  began  to  think  of  obtaining  for  themselves 
"  winter  privileges  ;"  that  is,  the  privilege  of  hiring  for  them- 


*  John  Warner  was  the  first  physician  of  Westbury,  Thomas  Foot  was  the  second.  The  last 
came  from  Branford  to  Westbury  about  17:!6.  He  was  the  son  of  John  and  Mary  Foote,  and 
settled  on  the  place  now  occupied  by  his  descendant,  Hubert  Scovill.  He  married  Elizabeth  Sut- 
liff  and  died  Dec.  19,  1776.  Both  Warner  and  Foot  were  sometimes  called  into  the  old  society  to 
prescribe,  as  appears  from  "  the  account  book"  of  Dea.  Clark. 


254 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 


selves  during  the  winter  months,  at  their  own  expense,  a  min- 
ister, and  of  being  exempt  during  the  time  from  okl  parish 
rates.  In  October,  1732,  they  petitioned  the  General  Court  as 
follows  : 

That  whereas  a  Considerable  Xumber  of  famiUes  in  the  Northwest  Corner  of  the 
bounds  of  Waterbury  town,  by  Reason  of  their  Great  Distance  from  y^  meeting 
house  which  is  to  Seuerall  Nine  miles  and  to  those  that  are  nearest  about  three 
and  Exceeding  bad  way  and  more  Especally  by  Reason  of  a  great  Riuer  which  is 
called  Waterbury  Riuer  which  for  Great  part  of  the  winter  and  Spring  is  not  pass- 
able, are  debared  the  hearing  of  the  word  preached  to  the  number  of  aboue  thirty 
families,  having  mettto  Gather  Sepr  1*732  and  appointed  in  behalf  of  us  Your  me- 
morialists the  Subscribers  then  and  there  to  petition  to  the  town  of  waterbury  for 
an  abatement  of  our  parts  of  the  ministers  Rate  for  the  space  of  four  months.  Viz. 
the  three  winter  mouths  of  this  present  winter  coming  and  the  month  of  march 
next  in  Case  we  Should  hire  a  minister  on  our  own  Charge  to  preach  the  word  among 
us  which  they  the  Rest  of  s^  town  Refusing  we  haue  appointed  Deacon  Samuel 
Brown  and  Lieut:  Samuel  Ueacock  our  Committee  to  Represent  and  Lay  our  Dificult 
Surcumstances  before  this  Honourable  assembly  and  the  Humble  prayers  of  Your 
memorialests  Saml  Brown  and  Saml  Heacock  in  behalf  of  that  part  of  the  aforesd 
agrieved  Inhabitants  being  for  Considerable  part  of  the  year  wholy  Debared  hear- 
ing the  word  of  God  preached,  is  that  we  may  have  the  liberty  to  hire  a  min- 
ister for  the  space  of  those  four  months  before  mentioned  (being  the  most  Difi- 
cult part  of  the  Year)  at  our  own  Charge  and  that  we  may  also  have  an  abatement 
of  our  parts  of  the  ministers  Rate  and  Be  Discharged  from  paying  the  minister  of 
the  town  of  waterbury  During  s^  four  months  as  we  haue  aminister  among  us 
Either  for  this  present  Year  or  for  alonger  time  as  You  in  Your  Great  wisdom 
shall  think  best,  and  your  memorialests  shall  as  in  Duty  Bound  Ever  pray. 

Dated  oct.  4th:  1732.  Saml  Browx. 

Saml  Heacok. 
[The  preceding  is  from  the  original  file,  on  tlie  back  of  which  are  the  following 
names,  thirty-two  in  number,  in  one  handwriting:] 

Cap.  Wm.  Heacock,  Elmr.  Warner,  i^aml.  Towner, 

Dr.  John  Warner,  Elicazar  Scott,  Henry  Cook, 

Mr.  John  Sutley,  Ebnr.  Kelsey,  Joseph  Hurlbut, 

Mr.  Jonathan  Scott,  Senr.,  Jon'n  Prindle,  Elnathan  Taylor, 

Jonathan  Scott,  Junr.,         Nathaniel  Arnold,  Isaac  Caswell,  [Castle,] 

Moses  Brunson,  Wm.  Scofield,  Joseph  Nicols, 

Ebnr.  Richardson,  Thomas  Jud,  Junr.,  Jonath.  Kelsey, 

David  Scott,  Obadiah  Scott,  Jon'n  Foot, 

John  Bronson,  Edwd.  Scofield,  Saml.  Heacock, 

Gershom  Scott,  Thomas  Heacok,  Saml.  Brown. 

Saml.  Thomas,  Saml.  Jud, 

A  committee,  consisting  of  Mr.  Joseph  Lewis  and  Mr.  Ste- 
phen Upson,  was  appointed  by  the  town  to  appear  before  the 
Assembly  and  oppose  the   movement  ;  but  tlie  prayer  was 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUEY.  'ZOO 

granted,  notwithstanding,  and  the  privilege  aHowed  for  four 
years. 

In  the  midst  of  the  movement  of  population  to  the  north- 
west, or  March  13,  1732-3,  "  the  centre  of  the  society  that 
shall  there  be  allowed  "  to  the  extent  of  one  mile  and  a  half 
each  way,  making  a  tract  of  three  miles  square,  was  seques- 
tered by  the  projDrietors  for  the  town's  use.  The  act  Avas 
not  to  j)rejudice  former  grants  and  divisions  not  laid  out. 
What  its  object  was  does  not  appear ;  but  I  suspect  it  was  de- 
signed to  retard  the  settlement  of  that  quarter  of  the  town. 
At  a  meeting  held  Jan.  12,  174T-8,  "the  p>roprietors  finding 
a  sequestration  made  at  Westbury  of  three  miles  square," 
did  by  their  vote  "  set  aside  and  make  void  "  the  same. 

In  the  spring  of  1733,  "  the  northwest  inhabitants  "  asked 
the  General  Assembly,  in  a  memorial,  to  set  them  off  as  a  dis- 
tinct society.  They  said  that  they  had  hired  a  minister — Mr. 
Daniel  Grranger  ;  that  they  "  are  universally  suited  in  him," 
and  flatter  themselves  that  "  he  is  not  ill  pleased  "  with  them. 
The  town,  they  continued,  had  already  "  agreed  that  there 
may  be  a  society  in  the  northwest  quarter  of  the  bounds  in  a 
convenient  time,"  and  had  chosen  a  committee  of  six  to  run 
the  parish  lines.     The  petition  was  not  granted. 

Under  date  of  March  Idth,  1733-4,  the  town  voted,  accord- 
ing to  the  record,  to  make  no  opposition  to  the  application  of 
the  northwest  inhabitants  to  the  General  Assembly  for  a  com- 
mittee to  fix  the  bounds  of  the  new  society,  the  expense  being 
defrayed  by  the  latter.  A  few  days  afterwards,  at  another 
meeting,  the  following  action  was  had  : 

Voted  that  a  Committee  be  Chosen  by  the  Town  to  Consider  y*  Scircumstances 
of  the  North  West  part  of  the  Town  and  Settle  A  line  In  order  to  Make  A  Society 
— And  Voted  that  the  worshipfull  Joseph  Whiting  Sq'',  Cap.  Roger  Nuton  of 
Milford,  Capt  John  Russell  of  Branford  be  a  Committee  to  Consider  the  Surcum- 
stances  of  the  Town  as  Above  Sd  and  to  Settle  a  line  as  Above  Sd. 

"When  the  question  of  the  new  society  came  before  the  Le- 
gislatui-e  in  May,  1734,  the  town  resisted  the  movement.  They 
resisted  it  on  the  ground  that  the  vote  of  March'14th,  previ- 
ous, was  not  in  fact  passed.  The  certificate  of  the  moderator 
of  the  meeting,  Isaac  Bronson,  was  produced,  which  affirmed 


256  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURT. 

that  in  consequence  of  the  absence  of  the  stated  clerk,  Dea. 
Samuel  Brown  was  chosen  scribe,  who  neglected  to  say  that 
tlie  vote  placed  on  record  was  negatived.  Probably  there 
were  excitement  and  disorder  in  the  meeting,  and  it  was  diffi- 
cult to  say  what  was,  or  what  was  not,  properly  done.  The 
selectmen  furthermore  certified  that  "  the  meeting  was  called 
for  to  procure  town  stock  [ammunition]  and  no  other  business." 
Consequently,  it  was  not  competent  to  act  on  the  subject  of  the 
vote,  that  not  being  embraced  in  the  calk  The  result  of  all 
was  that  there  was  no  action  on  the  part  of  the  Assembly. 

At  a  town  meeting  in  October  following,  the  vote  of  March 
14:th  was  "nul'd  and  made  void,"  it  being  "repugnant  to 
the  common  interest  of  the  town  ;"  while  at  the  same  time, 
the  meeting  resolved  to  choose  a  committee  among  themselves 
to  "set  out"  the  new  society,  "  which  will  be  more  easy  and 
for  the  better  contentment  of  the  town,  than  to  commit  it  to 
strangers."  In  the  meantime,  however,  the  committee  se- 
lected in  the  spring  had  attended  to  their  work  and  "  set  out  " 
the  parish  asked  for.  A  petition  was  presented  to  the  Legisla- 
ture, signed  by  twenty-three  individuals,  to  ratify  the  doings 
of  the  committee  and  grant  society-privileges  ;  but  the  re- 
quest was  again  denied. 

In  PiiL._1736j^the  northwestern  people  again  petitioned  to 
be  set-oiEv^as  a  distincF  soclet}^  They  used  the  same  argu- 
ments they  luTxPurged  T)eTore,  such  as  their  distance  from  the 
meeting  house  and  their  separation  from  it  by  a  river  which 
was  often  impassable.  They  represented  themselves  to  num- 
ber forty-five  families.  Their  request  was  refused,  but  they 
were  allowed  five  months'  winter  privileges  for  two  years. 
The  petitioners,  however,  were  not  discouraged.  They  re- 
newed their  efforts  in  May,  1737,  unsuccessfully.  In  October 
of  tlie^same  year,  the  town  appointed  Mr.  Joseph  Lewis  and 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins,  (the  town's  deputies,)  their  agents  to 
answer  another  memorial  which  had  been  prepared.  At  the 
same  time,  a  vote  was  passed  expressing  a  willingness  that  a 
legislative  committee  should  "  come  to  view  all  the  circum- 
stances of  the  town."  In  answer  to  a  petition,  a  committee 
was  sent  by  the  Assembly,  consisting  of  Capt.  John  Riggs, 
Capt,  Isaac  Dickerman  and  Mr.  John  Fowler.     They  report- 


FDSrS  ■  'JJSL  SABTAjN. 


oi>iu^^<^^^  /  o^^^^^^c^e^t^y 


HISTORY    OF   -WATERBURY. 


257 


ed,  in  Maj,  1738,  in  favor  of  the  petitioners  and  recommend- 
ed a  division  line.  The  line  commenced  at  the  southwest  cor- 
ner of  Capt  William  Jndd's  farm  at  Woodbury  bounds,  and 
ran  in  the  south  line  of  said  farm  to  the  southeast  corner  of 
Joseph  ^Nichols'  old  farm,  thence  to  [James]  Williams'  corn 
mill,  [now  Oakville  Co.,]  thence  straight  to  Jonathan  Prindle's 
house,  thence  east  to  Waterbury  river,  thence  up  the  river  to 
the  West  Branch  and  up  the  Branch  to  Litchfield  bounds. 

In  connection  with  the  report,  there  was  given  a  list  of  the 
heads  of  fiimilies  included  within  the  bounds  of  the  proposed 
society,  with  the  number  of  persons  in  each.  Thirty-seven 
families  are  thus  enunierated,  containing  two  hundred  and 
thirty  persons  : 


John  Smith, 

8. 

Moses  Brunson, 

11. 

Stephen  Scott, 

4. 

Thomas  Foot, 

9. 

Samuel  Hickox, 

1-2. 

Obadiah  Scott, 

4. 

Samuel  Thomas, 

8. 

Caleb  Clarke, 

9. 

David  Scott, 

5. 

Thomas  Hickox, 

5. 

Daniel  How, 

9. 

Nathaniel  Arnold, 

10. 

Samuel  Luis, 

0. 

John  Andruss, 

6. 

Ebenezer  Warner, 

5. 

George  Wellton, 

10. 

William  Andruss, 

3. 

James  Brown, 

8. 

Samuel  Judd, 

5. 

Jonathan  Scott, 

3. 

John  Warner, 

4. 

Gershom  Scott, 

6. 

Jonathan  Scott, 

7. 

James  Williams, 

7. 

James  Smith, 

2. 

Eleazer  Scott, 

3. 

George  Nichols, 

6. 

Thomas  Richards, 

9. 

Jonathan  Foot, 

5. 

James  Belemy, 

1. 

Ebenezer  Richards, 

4. 

Ebenezer  Baldwin, 

3. 

Richard  Semer 

4. 

William  Scovill, 

6. 

.Jonathan  Prindel, 

7. 

Jonathan  Garnsey, 

,  10. 

Thomas  Judd, 

4. 

The  town  remonstrated  against  the  line  recommended  by  the 
committee,  claiming  it  ran  too  far  south,  and  asked  the  appoint- 
ment of  anew  committee.  The  result  w^as,  another  committee, 
consisting  of  John  Fowler  of  Milford,  Samuel  Bassett  of  Derby 
and  Gideon  Johnson,  was  appointed.  They  reported  in  Oct. 
1738,  and  advised  the  same  division  line.  The  report  was 
adopted  and  the  society  incorporated  by  the  name  of  Westbury. 

Soon  after  Westbury  was  made  a  distinct  society,  the  people 
belonging  to  it  began  to  make  arrangements  to  build  a  meet- 
ing house,  and  applied  to  the  General  Court  to  direct  as  to  its 
location  and  to  fix  a  stake.  The  Court  sent  a  committee,  w^ho 
selected  a  place  one  third  of  a  mile  southeast  of  the  present 
churches,  a  few  rods  east  from  the  Litchfield  turnj^ike,  where 


the  old  burying  ground  is. 


17 


258  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

Tlie  place  for  a  meeting  house  being  determined,  the  West- 
bury  people  applied  to  the  town  to  provide  the  ground  and 
the  necessary  public  green.  Accordingly,  the  town  directed 
their  committee  for  laying  out  highways  in  the  "north  east  [it 
should  be  nortliwest]  quarter,"  "to  widen  the  highway  so  as 
to  accommodate  said  house  with  a  suitable  green,  according 
to  their  discretion,  and  to  aw"ard  satisfaction  to  the  owners  of 
the  land."  This  was  on  the  2ith  day  of  Dec.  1739,  and  in 
February  following  the  committee,  Juhn  Judd  and  John  Sco- 
vill,  laid  out  the  land  as  follows  : 

Beginning  at  the  southwest  corner,  a  heap  of  stones,  then  east  ten  rods  to  a 
heap  of  stones,  then  ten  rods  north  to  a  heap  of  stones,  then  west  eleven  rods  to  a 
heap  of  stones,  then  south  eighteen  rods  to  a  heap  of  stones  where  we  began — 
butting  west  on  land  left  for  a  highway,  north  on  Eleazer  Scott's  land,  south  on 
Stephen  Scott's  land,  east  on  Eleazer  Scott's  land,  or  common  land  as  set  out 
by  us. 

The  land  included  in  tliese  lines,  amounting  to  nearly  one 
acre,  belonged  to  Eleazer  Scott,  and  as  a  remuneration  for 
the  same  the  committee  awarded  him  "  three  acres  of  land  to 
lay  out  in  the  undivided  land,  or  fifty  shillings  in  money." 

At  what  time  the  meeting  house  was  finished  I  am  unable 
to  say,  though  1741  has  been  named  as  the  year,  Kev.  John 
Trumbull  was  the  first  minister.  The  Litchfield  County 
(South)  Church  Manual  says  he  was  settled  in  1739  ;  but  the 
inscription  on  his  monument  would  make  the  time  later,  which' 
says  tliat  he  "  died  Dec.  13,  1787,  in  the  seventy  third  year  of 
his  age  and  the  forty  eighth  of  his  ministry." 

Rev.  John  Trumbull  (called  Trumble  in  the  early  records) 
was  born  in  Suffield  in  1715.  The  ancestor  of  the  family  came 
from  England  and  settled  in  Ipswich  in  1645.  His  son,  John, 
removed  to  Suffield  and  had  three  sons,  John,  Joseph  and  Be- 
noni.  The  first,  John,  w^as  the  father  of  the  Eev.  John 
Trumbull  of  Westbury.  The  second,  Joseph,  settled  in  Leb- 
anon, and  was  the  father  of  Gov.  Jonathan  Trumbull.  The 
third,  Benoni,  was  the  grandfather  of  Benjamin  Trumbull, 
D.  D.,  the  historian. 

Mr.  Trumbull  graduated  at  Yale  College  in  1735  and,  at 
length,  (in  1772,)  became  a  member  of  the  Corporation  of  that 
institution.     His  attainments  as  a  scholar  were  respectable. 


HISTORY    OF   -WATERBITRY.  259 

Sometimes  lie  fitted  joung  men  for  college,  as  most  of  the 
ministers  of  tliat  day  did.  He  appears  not  to  have  been  dis- 
tinguished as  a  preaclier ;  but  the  great  influence  he  acquired 
over  his  people  was  obtained  by  his  generosity,  his  hospitable 
manners  and  friendly  intercourse.  If  one  of  his  parishioners 
had  lost  a  cow  or  had  met  "with  a  similar  calamity,  he  would  in- 
terest himself  in  the  matter,  head  a  subscription  for  his  relief 
and  persuade  others  to  sign  the  same.  It  was  said  of  him. 
that  if  one  of  his  people  turned  Episcopalian,  he  would  buy 
his  iarm.*  He  was  a  large  landholder  and,  for  the  times,  was 
considered  wealthy. 

Mr.  Trumbull  was  not  tall,  but  a  stout,  athletic  man.  He 
was  sound,  shrewd  and  humorous.  Horses  he  was  fond  of, 
and  bought  and  sold  them,  frequently,  with  success.  On  this 
account,  he  was  sometimes,  irreverantly,  called  jockey  Trum- 
bull. He  loved  innocent  sports,  and  had  once  been  a  great 
wrestler.  A  story  is  told  of  him,  which,  though  it  may  not 
be  wholly  true,  is  probably  not  a  pure  invention.  At  any  rate, 
it  illustrates  the  manners  of  the  times.  The  Waterbury  and 
Westbury  people  were  in  the  habit  of  meeting  at  some  half- 
way place,  in  the  long  autumnal  evenings,  to  contend  as  wres- 
tlers. They  met  around  a  fire  and  the  sport  was  commenced 
by  two  second-rate  athletes.  When  one  was  thrown,  the  van- 
quished called  in  another  from  his  own  side,  the  object  being 
to  vanquish  the  victor.  Thus  the  experts  were  called  out  in 
succession,  and  he  who  remained  last  on  his  legs  was  the  bully 
of  the  night.  In  several  contests,  at  the  time  of  which  I  am 
speaking,  Waterbury  had  proved  too  much  for  Westbury. 
Mr.  Trumbull  heard  of  the  defeat  of  his  boys  and  partook  of 
their  mortification.  On  occasion  of  the  next  contest,  he  dis- 
guised himself  and  went  down  unknown,  except  to  two  or 
three,  to  give  "  material  aid,"  if  necessary.  The  wrestlers 
were  called  in  one  after  another,  till  Westbury  was  again 
"  thrown  out,"  the  Waterbury  champion  having  grounded  the 
last  of  the  rival  party.  At  this  period,  when  the  signs  of  ex- 
ultation on  one  side  and  chagrin  on  the  other  were  becoming 
manifest,  a  stranger  was  dragged  in  from  the  outer  circle  of 

*  Dr.  McEwen's  Discourse  at  the  Centennial  Celebration  in  Litclifield,  1S52. 


Zt)U  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 

the  ring,  to  contend  for  tlie  Westbnry  boys.  The  parties  placed 
themselves  in  position  and  began  by  "playing  ronnd,"  to 
find  each  other's  qnalities.  After  a  little  time,  the  stranger, 
watching  his  opportunity,  canght  his  antagonist's  foot  and 
threw  him  npon  the  fire.  Shonts  filled  the  air  and  the  victor 
disappeared.  Great  was  the  exploit  and  great  the  mystery  of 
the  aifair ;  bnt  the  secret  finally  leaked  out.  The  story  reach- 
ed the  ears  of  Mr.  Leavenworth,  and  the  next  time  he  met  liis 
brother  Trumbull,  he  rebuked  him  for  his  levity,  and  censured 
him,  particularly,  for  throwing  his  rival  upon  the  fire,  by  which 
his  clothes  and  flesh  were  scorched.  Trumbull  agreed  that  he 
had  been  guilty  of  levity,  but  as  for  the  scorching,  he  thought 
it  his  duty  to  give  his  (Mr.  Leavenworth's)  parishioners  a  fore- 
taste of  what  they  might  expect  after  sitting  under  his  preach- 
ing! 

Mr.  Trumbull  was  married,  July  3d,  1744-,  to  Sarah,  daugli- 
ter  of  Mr.  Samuel  Whitman  of  Farmington.  Their  children, 
which  are  recorded  in  Waterbury,  were  1.  Sarah ;  b.  June 
20,  1745.  2.  A  son ;  b.  Feb.  27,  1746-7.  3.  Elizabeth ;  b. 
March  17,  1747-8.  The  two  last  died  in  infancy.  The  births 
of  John  and  Lucy  are  not  on  record.  His  widow  Sarah  and 
son  John  were  his  executors.  To  his  widow,  he  gave  his 
"  negro  wench  Lemmon  ;  to  his  son  John  of  Hartford,  his 
negro  girl  named  Mabel,  his  knee-buckles,  gun  and  powder 
horns  ;  to  his  daughter  Sarah  Perkins,  wife  of  Dr.  Caleb  Per- 
kins of  Hartford,  his  negro  girl  Peg,  then  in  her  possession  ;  to 
his  daughter  Lucy  Langdon,  wife  of  the  Pev.  Mr.  Langdon  • 
of  Danbury,  one  negro  girl,  "  late  now  in  her  possession."  He 
had  a  large  estate  of  both  real  and  personal  property.  He  is 
called  in  deeds,  "  clerk,"  that  being  the  legal  appellation  of  a 
clergyman. 

The  house  in  which  Mr.  Trumbull  lived,  and  in  which  his 
distinguished  son  was  born,  may  still  be  seen,  standing  on  the 
east  side  of  the  road  to  Waterbury,  a  little  south  of  the  old 
burying  yard.  His  successor  in  the  ministry  was  Uriel  Grid- 
ley,  (settled  in  1784.) 

The  second  meeting  house  was  built  in  1772,*  and  placed 

*  Richardson's  Sketch. 


HISTORY    OF    WATEEBUKT. 


in  tlie  present  center  of  the  village.  A  third  one  was  dedi- 
cated in  Janiiarj^,  1840, 

The  earlj  deacons  of  the  Westbury  clnirch  were  John  War- 
ner, Jonathan  Garnsey,  Timothy  Judd,  Thomas  ilickox,  Sam- 
uel ITickox,  Thomas  Femi,  Thomas  Dutton. 

The  settlement  of  Xorthbnry,  (afterwards  so  called,)  was 
commenced  a  few  years  after  that  of  Westbury.  The  first 
settlers  came  from  other  towns,  Litchfield,  Branford,  "W ailing- 
ford,  ISTew  Haven,  Korth  Haven,  &c.  Several  of  them  took 
up  their  residences  adjacent  to  the  river  on  the  west  side.  At 
this  place  and  also  on  the  opposite  side  of  the  river  hard  by, 
the  greatest  part  of  the  population  resided  for  several  years. 
The  first  settler,  so  far  as  my  enquiries  have  extended,  was 
Henry  Cook  of  Litchfield.  He  came  with  a  family  about 
1728,  and  had  a  ftirm  on  which  he  lived  on  the  west  bauk  of 
the  river,  not  far  from  the  Litchfield  boundary.  He  is  men- 
tioned as  of  Wooster  in  Dec.  1730,  but  that  name  at  that  pe- 
riod was  applied,  apparently,  to  all  the  northwest  part  of  the 
town  lying  west  of  the  Naugatuck.  He  had  several  sons, 
three  of  whom,  at  least — Jonathan,  Ebenezer  and  Henry,  Jr. — 
had  families  and  resided  in  Xorthbury. 

John  Sutliff,  so  far  as  appears,  was  the  next  settler.  He 
came  from  Branford  about  1730,  with  a  famil}',  and  built  on 
the  west  side  of  the  river.  He  too,  at  this  date,  is  spoken  of 
as  one  of  the  "  Wooster  "  people.  After  Sutlilf,  came  Sam- 
uel Towner,  Elnathan  Taylor,  Jonathan  Foot,  Ebenezer  El- 
well,  Thomas  Blakeslee,  Isaac  Castle,  (from  Westbury,)  Daniel 
Curtis,  Barnabas  Ford,  Gideon  Allen,  (from  Guilford,)  John 
Humaston,  (from  ]!:^orth  Haven,)  John  SutlifiF,  Jr.,  the  three 
first  before  the  close  of  1731  and  the  others  before  Nov. 
1736.  These  were  immigrants  from  other  towns.  The  first 
native  inhabitants  of  Waterbury  that  appeared  among  them 
were,  as  far  as  I  can  learn,  Ebenezer  Eichason,  (from  West- 
bur}',)  Lieut.  John  Bronson,  Jr.  and  Obadiah  Warner,  all  in 
1737. 

The  "  up  river  "  people,  few  in  number,  living  west  of  the 
river,  joined  themselves  to  the  northwest  inhabitants  in  their 
earliest  endeavors  to  obtain  winter  privileges,  in  Oct.  1732, 
Soon,  however,  as  population  increased,  they  found  it  expedi- 
ent to  unite  with  their  neighbors  on  the  other  side  of  the  river 


262  HISTORY   OF    WATEKBURY. 

and  to  act  independentlj.  Thus  united,  tliey  liad  become  so 
numerous  in  Oct,  ITS-i,  that  some  of  them — Heniy  Cook,  Ehe- 
nezer  Elwell  and  Samu.el  Towner — on  the  ground  of  their  liv- 
ing so  far  from  the  meeting  house,  requested  the  town  to  allow 
them  and  others  to  hire  preaching  the  ensuing  winter,  and  to 
abate  their  parish  rates  while  they  should  thus  hire.  The 
town  voted  "to  do  nothing  in  the  case."  On  the  26tli  day  of 
Oct.  1736,  the  request  was  repeated  in  writing,  and  was 
signed  by  twelve  persons — all  those  whose  names  have  been 
given  as  settlers  at  the  time,  except  John  Sutliff,  Sen.  They 
wanted  the  privilege  for  three  years,  three  months  in  each 
year — December,  January  and  February — with  exemption 
from  the  customary  ministerial  rates  during  the  time.  The 
liberty  asked  for  they  wished  to  be  extended  to  all  those  living 
"  within  two  and  a  half  miles  of  Barnabas  Ford's  now  dwell- 
ing-house." The  town  voted  to  grant  the  request.  But  it 
seems  there  was  a  misunderstanding  about  the  action  taken  on 
the  subject,  or  possibly  a  change  of  views  on  the  part  of  tlie 
majority;  and  the  proposed  exemption  from  parish  taxes  was 
afterwards  denied.  At  a  town  n.eeting  held  April  18,  1737, 
"  it  was  asked  whether  the  said  [northern]  inhabitants  shall 
be  exenq^t  from  ministerial  charge  in  the  town  for  so  much 
time  as  they  shall  hire  a  gospel  minister  among  [them]"  "in 
addition  to  a  grant  made  them  Sep.  29th,"  and  an  answer  was 
given  by  vote  in  the  negative. 

In  May,  the  disappointed  northern  people  applied  to  the 
General  Assembly  by  petition.  They  said  that  they  lived  "on 
a  tract  of  land  about  five  miles  square  whereof  Barnabas 
Ford's  dwelling  house  was  the  center" — that  the  town  voted 
(at  the  date  above  mentioned)  that  they  might  have  a  minister 
for  three  months  for  three  years,  "  with  exemption  from  minis- 
terial charges  for  the  said  term  " — that  they  had  employed  a 
preacher,  and  now  are  forced  to  pay  rates,  &c.  They  asked 
winter  privileges  and  the  usual  exemption  from  taxes.  The 
petitioners  M-ere  John  Sutliff,  Sen.,  Henry  Cook,  Ebenezer 
Elwell,  Barnabas  Ford,  Samuel  Towner,  Thomas  Blakeslee, 
John  How,  Gideon  Allen,  Jonathan  Foot,  Isaac  Castle,  Sam- 
uel Frost,  John  Sutliff,  Jr.,  John  Ilumaston,  Daniel  Curtis, 
Amos  Matthews,  Ebenezer  Bichason,  Phineas  Rovce — seven- 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBUKY.  263 

ten  in  all.  The  town  appeared  against  tliem  by  remonstrance, 
and  the  request  was  denied.  In  October,  however,  of  the  same 
year,  (1737,)  nineteen  petitioners,  Jolm  Bronson,  Obadiali 
Warner  and  John  Garnsey  (the  last  from  Westbury)  being 
new  ones,  renewed  the  application  and  were  successful.  Tliey 
were  released  from  the  usual  parish  charges  for  tliree  months, 
December,  January  and  February,  in  each  year,  for  three 
years. 

In  -May,  173S,  the  up-river  people  again  petitioned.  They 
asked  to  be  exempted  from  ministerial  taxes  "for  such  time 
only  as  they  had  the  word  dispensed  ;"  that  is,  during  all  the 
year,  j)rovided  they  employed  a  preacher  of  their  own.  The 
signers  numbered  nineteen,  the  names  of  Jeremiah  Peck,  Sen., 
Jeremiah  Peck,  (Jr.,)  Samuel  Curtis,  Zachariah  Sanford,  Wil- 
liam Ludington,  Caleb  Humaston,  appearing  for  the  first 
time.  They  said  that  the  nearest  of  them  lived  seven  miles, 
the  greater  part  eight  and  many  nine  or  ten  miles,  from  the 
meeting  house,  on  the  way  to  which  they  were  obliged  to 
cross  the  river  (which  was  often  deep  and  dangerous)  nine 
times.  The  request  was  denied ;  but  in  October  (1738)  it  was 
repeated.  There  were  now  twenty-three  signers,  Jacob 
Blakeslee's  name  appearing  among  them  for  the  first  time. 
They  spoke  of  their  three  years'  privilege  expiring  with  the 
month  of  February  ensuing,  and  asked  that  it  might  be  ex- 
tended for  two  years.  They  alledged  that  they  had  a  popula- 
tion of  139,  (as  I  read  the  figures,)  and  that  to  get  to  meeting 
at  the  town  center,  they  had  to  remove  bars  and  open  gates 
at  ten  dilTerent  places.  (In  the  original,  the  word  ten  is  writ- 
ten over  the  figures  17.)    The  petition  was  granted. 

After  Westbury  had  been  incorporated  as  a  distinct  society, 
in  Oct.  1738,  the  way  seemed  open  for  the  northern  inhabit- 
ants. As  they  no  longer  helped  support  the  town  minister, 
the  town  looked  upon  the  plan  of  a  separate  organization 
with  indifference.  At  the  October  session  of  the  Legislature, 
in  1739,  a  memorial  was  presented  by  John  Sutlifi^  and  Moses 
Blakeslee,  agents,  &c.  It  represented  that  the  people  were 
now 

Desirous  of  being  made  a  society  with  the  privileges  of  a  society  that  ther 
may  settle  a   gospel   minister   among   them  and   have  God's  word  preached  and 


:iO-±  HISTOEi'    OF    AVATEEBUEY. 

ordinances  administered  ;  and  having  prayed  said  old  society  in  said  Waterbtiry  to 
give  them  certain  bounds  and  obtained  a  vote  that  they,  said  old  society,  will  not 

oppose  them  [&c.]  as  by  the  vote  may  appear  Sep.  18,  1739 Whereupon   the 

memorialists  humbly  pray  that  this  honorable  Assembly  would  appoint  a  commit- 
tee and  send  them  to  view  their  circumstances,  and  state  the  line  between  said  old 
society  and  sd  inhabitants  and  to  make  return,  [&c.] 
[Attached  to  this  memorial  are  the  following  names ;] 
John  Sutliff,  William  Ludiugton,  Caleb  Humaston, 

Moses  Blakeslee,  Amos  Matthews,  Jolm  Garnsey, 

John  Bronson,  Noah  Pangborn,  John  Sutliff,  Jr., 

John  Warner,  Matthew  Ludington,  Thomas  Blakeslee, 

Obadiah  Warner,  Barnabas  Ford,  Gideon  Allen, 

Daniel  Potter,  Joseph  Clark,  [Jr.,]  Faniucl  Frost, 

Samuel  Curtis,  Jacob  Blakeslee,  John  IIow, 

Joseph  Clark,  Daniel  Curtis,  Jeremiah  Peck. 

Henry  Cook,  Zachariah  Sanford 

Only  four  of  these  twenty-six  signers  were  native  or  old  in- 
liabitants  of  Waterbury — John  Eronson,  Obadiah  Warner, 
Jeremiah  Peck  and  John  Warner.  The  committee  asked  for 
was  appointed.  They  entered  at  once  upon  their  duties  and 
indicated  the  parish  lines.  On  the  west  side,  the  line  ran 
down  the  West  Branch  and  Naugatuck  Kiver  along  the  West- 
bury  boundary  to  Spruce  Brook,  "  a  little  below  Upson's 
Island,"  thence  (easterly)  a  strait  line  to  the  falls  of  Hancox 
Brook,  thence  "  strait  to  south  side  of  Mr.  Noyes  farm,"  thence 
due  east  to  the  Farmington  line,  thence  round  in  the  old  town 
boundary.  The  report  was  approved  and  accepted,  and  the  so- 
ciety incorporated  by  the  name  of  Northbury,  all  at  the  same 
session,  Oct.  1739. 

The  first  record  of  the  society  of  Northbury  (the  third  soci- 
ety of  Waterbury)  is  a  warning  for  a  meeting,  on  the  applica- 
tion of  John  Sutliff,  Ebenezer  Kichason  and  Barnabas  Ford, 
dated  I^Tov.  10,  1T39,  signed  by  Thomas  Clark,  justice  of  the 
peace,  &c.  The  meeting  was  to  be  held  on  the  20th  day  of 
the  month,  at  which  time  the  first  meeting  took  place.  John 
Sutliff  was  chosen  moderator,  Barnabas  Ford,  clerk,  and  Moses 
Blakeslee,  John  Sutliff  and  Ebenezer  Kichason  [society's]  com- 
mittee. They  "maid  choise "  of  Samuel  Todd  to  be  their 
minister  and  voted  to  give  him  £150  settlement. 

That  is  to  say,  we  will  get  or  cause  to  get  sufficient  timber  for  a  house  thirty- 
two  foot  long,  twenty-five  wide  and  fifteen  foot  between  ients   [joints — was  not 


niSTOKY    OF   ^YATEEBURT.  265 

15  feet  the  length  of  the  posts  ?]  frame  and  set  it  up,  dig  and  stone  up  a  seller  under 
all  ye  bigest  rume,  underpin  y^  house,  ruf  it  on  each  side  fifteen  inches  and  on 
each  end  eight  inches,  bord  and  couer  y«  house  with  short  shingells,  prouide  all  y* 
materials  therefore,  couer  y^  sides  and  ends  with  rent  claboards  and  prouide  nalcs 
and  clabords  and  make  and  put  up  a  sutable  number  of  Winder  frames  and  finish 
all  y«  timber  work  of  y®  outside  of  y°  house,  find  stone  and  build  y«  chimleys,  two 
fire  places  below  and  1  aboue,  and  seal  the  bigest  loer  rume  and  glaze  it  and  pro- 
cure all  the  materials  for  it  and  prouide  all  y"  hooks  and  hinges  for  all  y^  rume 
and  prouide  all  y«  materials  for  doing  y«  work  as  above  menchened,  and  y®  same 
to  be  done  workmanlike  for  Mr.  Sam*  todd  by  y^  1"  of  October  in  y^  year  1740. 

[At  the  same  meeting,  Joseph  Clark,  John  How,  John  Bronson,  Thomas  Blakes- 
lee  and  Gideon  Allen  were  chosen  to  superintend  the  building  of  the  house  ;  and 
a  vote  was  passed  freeing  Jeremiah  Peck,  Daniel  Curtis  and  Barnabas  Ford  from 
the  charge  of  building.] 

At  y6  same  meeting,  it  was  voted  to  give  Mr.  Samuel  todd  for  y«  two  first  years 
from  ye  first  of  last  October  £100  salary  per  year  and  his  fire  wood  and  two  dayes 
work  a  man  from  sixteen  to  sixty  [years  of  age]  per  year,  one  in  summer  and  one 
in  ye  winter,  and  prouide  comfortable  house  roome  for  him  ye  first  year  upon  our 
own  causte,  and  ye  £100  per  year  to  be  paid  each  year  in  ye  months  of  Oct.  Nov. 
and  Dec. — and  after  ye  two  first  years  are  up  to  give  him  twel  [twelve]  pence 
upon  ye  pound  to  be  his  yearly  salary,  muny  or  publick  bills  of  credit,  until  our 
list  at  ye  lay  raises  100  and  [  *  *  ]  pounds  att  y*  rate  of  siluer  at  three  and 
tnenty  [shillings]  per  ounce;  and  y'  to  be  ye  stated  salary,  and  two  days  work  a 
man  til  twelue  pence  upon  ye  pound  makes  one  hundred  pounds  as  before  speci- 
fide  ;  and  to  find  him  his  fire  wood  so  long  as  he  shall  continue  in  ye  work  of  y® 
niinistrc  anionge  us. 

At  a  subsequent  meeting,  Marcli  8,  1740,  (1739-40,)  a  rate 
of  four  pence  on  the  pound  in  work  and  one  penny  in  money- 
was  laid.  At  the  same  time,  Moses  Blakeslee,  Jeremiali  Peck 
and  Daniel  Curtis  w^ere  appointed  to  present  to  Mr.  Todd  the 
"  call  "  of  the  society  and  to  receive  his  answer.  The  follow- 
ing is  his  reply,  bearing  date  March  3,  1739-10  : 

To  Jlr.  Jeremiah  Peck,  Moses  Blakeslee,  david  curtis — having  rcseeued  your 
call  and  proposals  in  behalf  of  ye  sosiati  to  settle  with  you  in  ye  work  of  y*  min- 
istry, and  hauing  waid  and  considered  them  I  declare  myself  willing  upon  them  to 
settle  with  them  in  ye  work  of  ye  ministry,  prouided  they  prosced  to  a  regular 
ordanation  upon  or  before  ye  eight  day  of  may  next  and  pray  god  you  may  be  a 
blessing  to  rae  and  I  to  you. 

Sami'    todd. 

It  was  decided  that  the  seventh  of  May  should  be  the  day 
of  the  ceremony,  at  w^hich  time,  probably,  the  ordination  took 
place.  Afterwards,  (Aug.  10,  1710,)  the  society  granted  to 
Lieut.  John  Bronson,  in  work  or  money,  £3,  18s.  for  keeping 
the  council. 


266 


HISTOKY    OF    WATERBURY. 


liev.  Samuel  Todd,  tlie  first  minister  of  jSTortlibuiy,  was  the 
seventli  cliild  and  fifth  son  of  Samuel  and  Marj  ("  Tole  ")  Todd 
of  Nortli  Haven,  and  was  born  March  6,  1716-17.  He  was 
graduated  at  Yale  College  in  1734,  at  the  age  of  17."  He 
married,  August  31,  1739,  Mercy,  d.  of  Mr.  Peter  Evans  of 
Korthfield.  His  children  were,  Alathea,t  (b,  Dec.  7,  1710,) 
Marj,  Irene,  Eliel,  Alatheaj  Lucj,  Samuel,  Lucy  and  Chloe. 
His  house  stood  a  few  rods  south  of  tlic  meeting  hon^e  built 
during  his  ministry. 

About  the  time  of  Mr,  Todd's  settlement,  the  Great  Eevival  of 
Kew  England  commenced.  He  was  at  first,  it  is  stated,  opposed 
to  it,  or,  at  least,  regarded  it  with  distrust.  He  went  to  Stock- 
bridge  to  get  a  more  intimate  knowledge  of  its  practical  work- 
ings, and  came  back  with  opinions  wholly  changed.  He  at  once 
introduced  "  conference  meetings,"  and  labored  to  rouse  the 
feelings  of  his  church  and  peo])le.  The  result  was,  many  of 
his  parishioners  and  finally  a  majority,  including  some  of  the 
principal  men  in  both  the  church  and  society,  turned  against 
him,  denounced  his  doctrines  and  measures,  and  at  length  ob- 
tained the  control  of  the  meeting  house  and  established  in  it 
Episcopal  worship. 

In  Jan.  1712-3,  tlie  society  refused  to  giv^e  Mr.  Todd  "any 
thing  for  the  sink  of  money,"  (depreciation  of  the  currenc}",) 
but  they  agreed  to  pay  him  five  pounds  old  tenor  for  not  fin-  , 
ishing  his  house  in  the  stipulated  time.  In  December,  1743, 
they  voted  to  allow  him  £16  yearly,  in  place  of  two  days'  work 
each,  and  £12  old  tenor  for  firewood.  In  1745,  he  was  to 
have  for  his  salary  "  owne  hundred  forty  five  pounds  old 
tenor  money;"  in  1747,  £180;  in  174S,  £300  ;  in  1749,  £250 
and  £30  for  firewood,  payable  in  the  depreciated  old  tenor 
currency.  In  1755,  he  was  to  receive  £46  lawful  money, 
(specie  currency) — wheat  to  be  valued  to  him  at  3s.  6d.  per 
bushel,  rye  at  2s.  4d,,  Indian  corn  at  Is.  9d.,  oats  at  10-Jd., 
pork  at  3d,  per  pound, 

*  The  Manual  of  the  Plymouth  Church  and  Goodwin's  Genealogy  of  the  Foote  Family  say  he 
was  graduated  in  1834,  at  the  age  of  15.  The  New  Haven  record  gives  his  birth  as  above.  The 
Genealogy  affirms,  also,  that  he  died  in  1789,  aged  TO,  and  that  Mary  Evans  was  his  mother. 

t  According  to  tradition,  the  first  burial  in  Northbury  was  that  of  a  little  girl  of  Mr.  Todd, 
who  was  drowned  in  a  spring  about  IT41 .  It  was  eight  years  before  another  death  took  place,  when 
the  lung  fever  made  its  appearance,  of  which  thirty  died.  [Manuscript  notes  of  the  Rev.  H. 
D.  Kitchell,  late  of  Plymouth  Hollow.] 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBURY.  267 

Feb.  12,  1756,  Mr.  Todd  made  a  written  communication  to 
tlie  society  : 

Brethren  and  Friends — there  are  evidently  many  difficulties  subsisting  among 
us,  in  particular  with  regard  to  my  support  among  you,  j^  ^yhich  we  have  great 
reason  to  suspect  is  one  great  ground  and  rise  of  all  j^  rest  y^  which  is  jus* 
ground  of  great  Humelation  and  Lemmantatiou  as  greatly  threttening  our  ruin 

lie  offered  to  take  as  salary  what  might  be  raised  by  a  con- 
tribution on  the  sabbath  once  in  two  months  and  what  any 
miglit  hand  in  at  other  times,  with  the  grant  of  the  "  ministry 
money."  The  society  accepted  the  offer.  But  the  plan  did 
not  work,  and  a  parish  meeting  the  next  year  again  voted  Mr. 
Todd  £-L6.  This  was  to  be  his  annual  saLarj^  for  four  years. 
The  fifth  year  it  was  to  be  £51  and  afterwards  £56  per  annum, 
(currency  of  the  specie  standard,  doubtless.)  This  arrange- 
ment was  satisfactory  to  Mr.  Todd.  A  good  understanding, 
however,  was  not  obtained,  and  in  Dec.  1763,  the  society  voted 
to  choose  a  committee  of  wise  and  just  men  to  hear  and  deter- 
mine whether  said  society  had  fulfilled  their  covenant  agree- 
ment with  Mr,  Todd. 

Mr.  Todd's  ministry  in  N^orthbury  was  now  drawing  to  a 
close.  After  having  in  vain  tried  to  settle  the  difficulties  with 
his  parish  by  a  council,  he  at  length,  with  broken  health,  ask- 
ed to  be  dismissed.  At  a  meeting  the  third  Monday  of 
April,  1764,  the  society  voted  that  on  account  of  difficulty 
about  Mr.  Todd's  support,  and  his  "  prevailing  bodily  indispo- 
sition for  some  time  past,  whereby  he  is  much  disabled  from 
carrying  on  the  work  of  the  ministry,  as  likewise  his  request 
to  lay  down  the  work  of  the  ministry,"  they  consented.  At  the 
same  time,  the  meeting  "maid  choise  of  Dea.  John  Warner 
and  Dea.  David  Dutton  and  Lieut.  Danl.  Potter  to  be  a  com- 
mitty  to  apply  to  y^  Association  of  this  (Kew  Haven)  County 
for  advice  in  order  to  have  the  pulpit  supplyed  and  to  bring 
in  a  candidate  to  preach."  Soon  afterwards,  a  communica- 
tion was  received  from  Daniel  Humphrey,  John  Trumbull, 
Benjamin  Woodbridge  and  Mark  Leavenworth,  a  committee  of 
the  xYssociation,  lamenting  their  troubles  and  alienations,  &c., 
and  recommending  the  calling  of  a  council  to  settle  matters, 
or,  if  thought  best,  to  dismiss  Mr.  Todd. 


208  IIISTOllY    OF    WATEEBUEY. 

Mr.  Todd  appears  to  have  been  dismissed  in  August,  1764 ; 
and  in  Dec.  following  the  society  voted  that  thej  "would 
leave  all  their  diferances  with  Mr.  Samuel  Todd  in  his 
demands  uj^on  this  society  for  and  upon  account  of  his  sal- 
ary from  time  past  untill  this  day  unto  indeferant  gentlemen 
such  as  Mr.  Todd  and  the  sosiaty  commity  shall  agree  to 
have  and  abide  by  the  doings  of  sd  arebitrators,  and  Phineas 
Royce  and  Daniel  Potter  to  assist  the  sosiaty  commity 
herein." 

Mr.  Todd  removed  from  Northbury  to  Lanesboro,  Mass., 
where  he  preached  about  two  years.  Thence  he  went  to 
Adams,  where  he  organized  the  first  Congregational  church 
in  that  place,  and  was  its  pastor  till  1778.  He  took  a  deep 
interest  in  the  Ee volution,  was  an  ardent  AVhig  and,  for  a 
brief  period,  a  chaplain  in  the  continental  army.  He  next 
lived  for  a  short  time  at  Northfield,  with  a  son.  About  1782, 
he  removed  to  Orford,  N".  H.,  wdiere  he  resided  w^ith  his  chil- 
dren, preaching  occasionally  in  the  new  settlements,  till  his 
death,  June  10,  1789. 

Mr.  Todd's  ardor,  in  the  earlier  years  of  his  ministry,  some- 
times got  the  better  of  his  discretion  ;  but  he  is  believed  to 
have  been  a  sincere  man,  devoted  to  his  work  and  w^illing  to 
suffer  if  need  be  in  the  performance  of  a  supposed  duty.  It  is 
affirmed  that  he  had  great  decision  of  character  and  a  mind  of 

the  full  averao-e  streno-th. 

o  o 

After  the  dismission  of  Mr.  Todd,  Rev.  Asahel  Hathaway 
officiated  for  a  time  in  Korthbury.  On  the  21:th  of  Sept.  17G4, 
the  society  made  "  choise  "  of  him  "  to  preach  as  a  proba- 
shnner  in  order  for  settlement,"  and  Dec.  17,  1764,  invited 
him  to  become  their  settled  minister.  He  declined.  After- 
wards, in  Jan.  1765,  Mr.  John  Bliss  was  chosen  to  preach  as  a 
"  probasliuner,"  and  in  April,  Mr.  Ephraim  Judson  was  select- 
ed for  a  like  service. 

At  a  meeting  held  the  first  Monday  of  July,  1765,  the  soci- 
ety, "  by  a  iinevarsal  note,"  expressed  a  desire  to  hear  Mr. 
Andrew  Storrs  preach.  A  month  afterwards,  Mr.  Storrs  was 
requested  to  become  a  candidate  for  settlement,  and  on  the 
last  Monday  of  Sept.,  was  "  called  to  settel,"  by  an  "  imevarsal 
note."     The  society  agreed  to  give  him,  nnder  date  of  Oct. 


HISTORY    OF   "WATEEBURY.  269 

2S,  1765,  £180  settlement  to  be  paid  in  two  years,  £40  cash 
and  £50  in  provisions,  each  year  ;  and  £60  salary  for  two 
years,  £20  cash  and  the  remainder  in  wheat,  rye,  Indian  corn, 
&c.  After  the  two  jfirst  years,  the  salary  was  to  be  £70  per 
year,  £30  cash  and  £40  in  wheat,  rye  and  Indian  corn,  at  the 
market  price  on  the  first  day  of  January,  annually,  "allow- 
ing the  expense  of  tranceport  to  market  not  exceeding  in 
distance  New  Haven,  Middletown  or  Hartford."  Fire- 
wood was  also  to  be  furnished,  and  each  "  man "  was  to 
give  two  days'  work  yearly  for  two  years.  Mr.  Storrs  ap- 
appeared  personally  in  the  meeting  and  made  known  his  ac- 
ceptance of  the  terms  proposed.  To  make  everything  agree- 
able, a  vote  was  passed  "  to  chuse  a  committee  to  stand  obliged 
for  the  payment  of  such  purchases  as  Mr.  Storrs  shall  make 
for  a  settlement." 

Mr.  Storrs  became  the  settled  pastor  of  the  church  and  society 
Nov.  27,  1765,  and  was  continued  in  that  relation  till  his 
death,  March  2,  1785.  He  was  born  in  Mansfield,  Conn,,  Dec. 
20,  1735.  He  appears  to  have  been  indisposed  for  some  time 
liefore  his  decease,  so  that  a  vote  was  passed,  Dec.  16,  1784, 
"  that  the  sosiaty  committey  should  bee  ortherized  to  assist 
Mr.  Storrs  to  sopply  the  pulpit  as  far  as  it  can  be  done  by  in- 
viting in  the  naboring  jentcbuen  minerstors  to  preach." 

Of  Mr.  Storrs,  the  Kev.  Mr.  Hart  once  said,  in  a  manuscript 
sermon,  "  He  is  still  remembered  by  our  aged  people  with 
affectionate  reverence  as  a  wise  and  faithful  pastor." 

After  the  death  of  her  husband,  Mrs.  Storrs  was  authorized 
by  the  society,  March  21,  1785,  "  to  use  the  wood  got  lor  Mr. 
Storrs."  Authority  was  also  given,  June  6,  to  print  500  copies 
of  the  funeral  sermon. 

The  Rev.  Simon  Waterman  succeeded  Mr.  Storrs,  and  was 
installed  Aug.  29,  1787.  He  was  dismissed  Nov.  15,  1809. 
The  Rev.  Luther  Hart  was  his  successor. 

The  early  deacons  of  the  Northbury  church  were  Jeremiah 
Peck  and  Moses  Blakeslee,  (appointed  1740,)  John  Warner, 
David  Dutton,  Daniel  Potter,  John  Sutlift*,  Eliakim  Potter,"-^ 
David  Smith. 


*  Dec.   9,    1VT4,   "voted  that  Dea.  Eliakim   Pctter  shall  read   the  Psalm  for  the   future.' 
(Society  Record.) 


270  HISTORY    OF    WATEKBUEY. 

The  people  of  Nortlibuiy,  before  they  were  incorporated  as 
a  distinct  society,  had  built  a  lionse,  designed  for  the  common 
uses  of  the  people  but  called  a  school  house,  in  which  they  met 
for  public  worship.  The  land  on  which  it  was  erected,  ap- 
pears to  liave  been  owned  by  Jolm  llow.  This  land  How- 
conveyed,  Sept.  6,  1733,  "for  a  valuable  consideration,"  to 
John  Southmayd,  clerk,  Sonthmayd,  "  for  good  causes  and  con- 
siderations," quit-claimed  the  same,  at  the  same  date,  to  Mr.  Jolm 
Sutliff,  Ebenezer  Richason,  John  How,  Thomas  Blakeslee  and 
Barnabas  Ford  and  the  rest  of  the  inhabitants  living  within 
two  miles  and  a  half  of  said  Barnabas  Ford's  now  dwelling 
house,"  &c.  The  land  is  understood  to  have  been  a  donation 
to  the  future  society  from  John  How.  It  is  described  in  South- 
may  d's  deed  as 

One  acre  near  sd  Ford's  dwelling  house  in  Waterbury  on  which  said  inhabitants 
have  already  set  up  a  house  under  the  denomination  of  a  S[chool  ?]  house  for  the 
sd  inhabitants  to  meet  in  to  carry  on  the  public  worship  of  God  on  the  sabbath, 
[&c.]  bounded  to  the  west  on  land  left  for  a  highway  and  How's  land,  south  on 
Barnabas  Ford's  land,  cast  and  north  on  said  How's  land.  [Land  Records,  Yol. 
V,  p.  15.] 

Soon  after  the  settlement  of  Mr.  Todd,  the  Churchmen  of 
Is"orthbury  obtained  a  majority  of  the  A'otes,  and  took  exclu- 
sive possession  of  the  house  of  worship.'"  The  votes  are 
alledged  to  have  been  eighteen,  of  which  eleven  were  on  the 
side  of  the  majority  ;  but  this  number  could  not  have  com- 
prehended all  the  legal  votes  in  the  society.  As  a  conse- 
quence of  this  movement,  the  Congregational  minority  were 
obliged  to  look  for  quarters  elsewhere.  The  society  therefore 
voted,  Oct.  6,  1740,  to  apply  to  the  General  Assembly  for  a 
committee  "  to  stake  a  place  to  set  a  meeting  house,"  and  aj)- 
pointed  John  Bronson  agent  to  take  charge  of  this  business. 
The  Assembly  did  nothing,  and  in  the  following  May,  (1741,) 
another  petition  was  presented  by  Moses  Blakeslee,  Thomas 
Blakeslee  and  John  Bronson,  a  committee.  They  asked  for 
the  interposition  of  the  Assembly,  saying  "  your  honors  are 
sometliino;  informed  of    our  circumstances  which  are  trulv 


*  This  house  stood  in  Plymouth  Hollnw,  at  the  intersection  of  the  north  and  south  (or  river 
road)  and  the  east  and  west  road  running  through  the  center,  near  the  spot  where  tlie  scliool 
house  lately  stood. 


HISTORY    OF    WATEEBUKY.  271 

great  and  very  distressing,"  &c.  It  appears  that  the  previons 
meetings  of  the  society  and  the  votes  appointing  the  officers 
liad  heen  irregnlar.  In  consequence  of  this  fact,  and  of  the 
"  broken  and  confused  state  of  affairs,"  the  Assembly  appoint- 
ed Benjamin  Hall  of  Wallingford  and  John  Riggs  of  Derby, 
a  connnittee,  who  were  authorized  "  to  call  and  conduct  a  so- 
ciety meeting  and  to  advise  and  give  an  opinion  about  a  place 
f<ir  a  meetinghouse."  The  committee,  in  pursuance  of  instruc- 
tions, warned  a  meeting  to  beheld  on  the  10th  day  of  June,  1 741, 
at  which  meeting,  Joseph  Clark  was  chosen  clerk,  and  Deacon 
Moses  Blakeslee,  John  Bronson  and  Serg.  John  Warner,  com- 
mittee. The  Assembly's  committee,  also,  "  advised  and  direct- 
ed them  [the  society]  to  meet  on  the  sabbath  for  ten  months 
in  the  year  at  the  house  called  the  S:chool  house,  and  the  othei: 
two  months  at  the  dwelling  house  of  Joseph  Clark,  namely 
January  and  February."  They  made  a  report  of  their  doings 
at  the  October  session,  which  was  "  approved  and  accepted." 
At  the  same  session,  the  society  again  petitioned  for  a  commit- 
tee to  locate  the  meeting  house.  Several  influential  persons 
disapproved  of  this  movement.  Certain  of  them,  to  the  num- 
ber of  ten,  to  wit,  John  How,  Ebenezer  Elwell,  Barnabas 
Ford,  John  Sutliff,  Thomas  Blakeslee,  Daniel  Curtis,  Samuel 
Frost,  John  Sutliff,  Jr.,  Abel  Sutlitf  and  Caleb  Ilumaston, 
signed  a  remonstrance.  They  did  not  want  a  connnittee  called, 
because — "  1.  The  committee  sent  from  the  Honorable  Assem- 
bly last  May  viewing  our  circumstances  advised  us  not  to  build, 
and  we  well  know  that  their  advice  was  good  considering  our 
poverty."  2.  Only  nine  were  in  the  vote  for  sending  for  a  com- 
mittee. 3.  The  meeting  was  not  warned  "  to  confer  about  any 
such  thing." 

Notwithstanding  the  opposition,  Capt.  John  Biggs  and  Capt. 
John  Fowler  were  appointed  to  designate  a  jilace  for  a  meet- 
ing house.  At  the  next  session,  in  May,  (1742,)  the  commit- 
tee reported  that  they  had  selected  a  place  and  set  a  stake 
"  twenty  rods  on  the  westward  side  of  the  One  Pine  Swamp," 
and  thirty  rods  south  of  the  road  leading  from  the  river  east- 
ward. The  report  was  accepted  and  approved  ;  but  nothing 
was  done,  immediately,  in  the  way  of  building. 

Dec.  3,  1744,  the  society  voted  to  build  a  meeting  house  at 


13(1;  HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKY. 

the  committee's  stake,  and  resolved  for  the  ensuing  year  to 
meet  for  worship  at  the  houses  of  Daniel  Potter,  Sanuiel  Todd 
and  Caleb  Weed.  At  a  meeting  held  Sept.  24,  1745,  in  con- 
sequence of  a  pending  vote,  "Barnabas  Ford,  Thomas  Blakslee 
and  David  Blakslee  declared  their  decent  from  their  land  being 
taxed  for  the  building  a  meeting  house  for  the  decenters  open- 
ly in  the  meeting."  A  vote  was  then  passed  to  apply  to  the 
Assembly  for  a  tax  on  land  of  6d.  per  acre  for  four  years, 
the  lands  of  the  Church-of-England  men  to  be  exempted.  It 
was  also  agreed  that  an  attempt  should  be  made  "  to  have  the 
middle  stake  confirmed  for  the  meeting  house."  John  Warner 
acted  as  the  agent  of  the  society,  and  in  his  memorial  presented 
in  Oct.  (1745)  represented  that  about  one  third  of  the  society 
liad  declared  for  the  Church  of  England,  and  that  the  western 
inhabitants,  for  whose  accommodation  the  old  stake  had  been 
set,  had  "  generally  "  so  declared.  In  the  name  of  those  avIio 
sent  him,  he  desired  that  the  stake  might  be  placed  "  farther 
east  where  the  middle  stake  was  set  up,"  and  that  a  tax  be 
laid,  &c.  The  prayer  was  granted  and  a  resolution  passed  as 
follows : 

Resolved  that  the  middle  stake  erected  by  sd  Committee  standing  by  the  path 
leading  from  Dea.  Blakeslee's  to  Isaac  Castle's  dwelling  house,  about  twenty  rods 
eastward  from  the  brook  that  runs  from  the  north  end  of  the  hill  caHed  One  Pine 
toward  the  river,  shall  be  and  hereby  is  established  to  be  the  place  whereon  to 
build  a  meeting  house  in  said  parish — And  that  all  the  unimproved  lands  in  the  ' 
limits  of  said  parish  (exclusive  of  those  belonging  to  such  persons  as  have  profess- 
ed for  the  Church  of  England)  shall  and  hereby  is  taxed  at  the  rate  of  Cd.  old 
tenor  currency  per  acre,  for  the  space  of  four  years  next  coming,  to  be  paid  by 
the  owners  of  such  lands,  and  to  be  improved  for  the  building  of  sd.  meeting 
house  and  for  the  support  of  their  minister. 

Much  difliculty,  however,  was  experienced  in  the  collection 
of  the  tax  ;  and  in  Dec.  1T47,  the  society  voted  to  pay  all 
necessary  charges  for  law-suits  against  Caleb  Ilumaston,  (col- 
lector,) for  distraining  for  taxes. 

Dec.  9,  17-45,  there  were  signs  of  decisive  steps  in  the  way  of 
building  a  meeting  house.  Dea.  Moses  Blakeslee,  Lieut.  Dan- 
iel Curtis,  Ens.  John  AYarner,  Joseph  Clark,  Jr.  and  Caleb 
Humaston  were  then  chosen  building  committee,  and  it  was 
determined  that  the  house  should  be  forty-five  feet  by  thirty- 
five,  on  the  o-round. 


J.KilZy.  J=^i^-ur.  Zr.T. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKT.  273 

At  a  town  meeting  of  Waterbniy,  held  Dec.  8,  1740,  the 
to\rn  voted  ''  npon  the  request  of  Xorthbuiy  parish  with 
respect  to  the  place  to  set  their  meeting  house  upon,  to  pur- 
chase the  place  as  it  shall  be  stated  as  to  length  and  breadth 
by  a  committee  chosen  by  the  town."  Capt.  Timothy  Hop- 
kins, Capt.  Stephen  Upson,  Serg.  Thomas  Porter,  Capt.  Sam- 
uel Hickox  and  Capt.  William  Judd  were  appointed  the  com- 
mittee.    Their  doings  are  recorded  under  date  of  Dec.   10, 

1746.  They  "  set  out  a  j)lace  or  green  convenient  for  a  place 
of  parade  and  burying  place  if  need  be,"  eight  rods  south  and 
eighteen  rods  north  "  from  the  stake  appointed  by  the  Court 
for  the  meeting  house  for  said  parish,"  (of  (ISTorthbury,)  "  and 
sixteen  rods  west  at  each  end  from  the  east  line  of  John  Brins- 
mead's  farm,"  being  twenty-six  rods  in  length  and  sixteen  in 
breadth.— [Land  Records,  Yol.  YI,  p.  252.] 

The  above  two  acres  and  six  tenths,  belonging  to  Mr.  Brins- 
mead,  or  Brinsmade,  of  Milford,  were  paid  for  by  the  town. 
In  order  to  enlarge  the  green,  certain  individuals,  as  it  ap- 
pears, purchased  of  Mr.  B.  four  tenths  of  an  acre  adjoining. 
To  the  whole,  Mr.  Brinsmade  seems  to  have  added  one  acre 
as  a  donation.  These  four  acres  and  one  acre  more,  making 
five  acres,  Mr.  B.  conveyed,  April  1,  1747,  to  Caleb  Humas- 
ton  for  "£15  old  tenor."  The  land  is  described  as  lying 
"  north  of  the  hill  called  the  One  Pine."  Of  this  tract,  Hum- 
aston  deeded  the  four  acres  intended  for  a  green,  Dec.  3, 

1747,  to  the  society's  committee  of  Northbury,  said  land 
being  situated  "  about  the  meeting  house,"  the  same  to  be  taken 
off  the  five  acres  had  of  Brinsmade,  beginning  at  the  south- 
east corner,  thence  running  west  twenty-two  rods  by  the 
highway,  to  be  twenty  rods  wide  at  the  north  end,  butting 
west  on  Brinsniade's  land,  north  on  Humaston's  land,  east  on 
Mr.  Todd's  land,  south  on  highway,  and  running  north  and 
south  far  enough  to  make  four  acres, — [Land  Records,  Yol. 
YI,  p.  257.] 

Sept.  22,  1'747,  the  society  voted  that  any  man  of  the  Inhabitance  may  build 
a  sabbath  day  house  for  conveniency  so  will,  prouided  he  sets  it  on  y«  green  on 
which  the  meting  house  stands,  prouided  he  sets  it  on  the  outside  on  the  line 
whare  the  society  commity  then  standing  shall  say  fit,  and  at  s''  meting  they  voted 
to  cleer  the  meting  house  green  by  outing  brush  and  clearing  it  away. 

IS 


274  IIISTOKY   OF   WATERBURT. 

Dec.  26,  114:9,  a  vote  was  passed  to  finish  the  lower  part  of  the  meeting  house 
up  to  the  girts,  and  to  have  a  Pew  upon  each  side  of  the  pulpit  and  owne  each 
side  of  the  fore  door,  all  4  in  number,  and  the  rest  fitted  up  with  seats. 

From  the  last  vote  I  infer  that  the  new  house  was  nearly 
ready  for  occupation  in  17-i9.  It  was  not  completed,  how- 
ever, for  many  years. 

At  last,  Dec.  4,  1752,  the  business  of  seating  was  taken  up. 
Stephen  Curtis  and  William  Curtis  were  placed  in  the  fore 
seat ;  Ezekiel  Sanford  and  Phineas  Royce  in  the  pew  by  the 
pulpit  stairs ;  Samuel  Curtis  and  Benjamin  Upson  in  the 
pew  next  to  the  north  side  of  the  pulpit ;  Jonathan  Cook  and 
John  Humaston  in  the  second  seat ;  "William  Andruss  in  the 
third  seat. 

Under  date  of  Dec.  7,  1753,  I  find  a  classification  of  the 
seats,  according  to  rank,  designed  as  a  guide  to  the  seating 
committee.     Here  is  the  record  : 

Dignifying  y*  meeting  house  by  sosiaty  meeting  as  followeth — first,  the  fore 
seats ;  'id  y^  pews  by  the  pulpit  stares  ;  od  y®  pews  ioining  to  the  pulpit  north  ;  4th 
ye  pews  by  y^  fore  dore ;  y*  second  seat ;  the  Little  pew  ;  y*  pew  at  the  South 
end  windo  and  the  pew  in  opposition  at  y«  north  end  ;  corner  pew  at  y®  South 
west  corner  and  the  pew  at  y^  north  west  corner  ;  the  3d  seat  and  the  pew  by  the 
south  dore  and  the  pew  by  the  north  door  ;  the  4th  seat ;  the  pew  by  the  South 
stares  and  the  pew  by  the  north  stares  and  next  y^  hind  seat ;  y^  front  seat  in  y» 
galery  next  to  y«  3d  seat  and  y«  fore  seat  in  y<*  galery  next  to  y«  pews  by  the 
north  dore. 

From  what  can  be  gathered,  I  conclude  that  the  meeting 
house  was  probably  begun  in  1746  ;  that  it  was  occuj^ied,  in 
mild  weather,  in  1750  ;  that  it  was  glazed  and  the  lower  part 
put  in  order  for  use  throughout  the  year  in  1753  ;  that 
the  galleries  were  not  fitted  up  till  1762,  and  that  the  house 
was  not  finally  finished  till  176S. 

Early  in  17S3,  the  question  of  erecting  a  new  meeting  house 
was  agitated,  and  in  April,  a  vote  (63  to  20)  in  favor  of 
building  was  passed.  At  the  same  time,  a  committee  was  cho- 
sen to  apply  to  the  County  Court  to  say  where  it  should  be 
placed.  But  there  was  delay,  and  another  Committee  was  se- 
lected for  the  same  purpose,  in  Jan.  1788.  In  March,  1790,  it 
was  decided  that  the  house  should  be  sixty-five  feet  by  forty- 
five,  and  a  tax  be  laid  of  Is.  on  the  pound,  to  be  paid  in  sheep, 
neat  cattle,  grain  and  building  materials,  the  price  of  the  lat- 


HISTOKY    OF   WATEKBURY.  275 

ter  to  be  fixed  by  a  committee.  Dcaniel  Potter,  J.  A.  Wright, 
Isaac  Curtis  and  Zacliariali  Hitchcock  were  the  building  com- 
mittee, and  Avere  directed  to  inquire  what  tlie  house  would 
cost — the  work  to  be  done  by  the  "jobb,"  They  reported 
that  Capt.  Thomas  Dutton  and  his  son,  Thomas  Dutton,  3d, 
|)roposed  to  erect  it,  sixty-five  feet  by  forty-five,  for  £727, 
19s. ;  or,  if  it  was  made  two  feet  smaller  each  way,  for  £700, 
Tlie  last  proposition  was  accepted.  In  N'ovember,  the  society 
directed  a  committee  to  contract  with  Capt.  Dutton  and  his 
son  to  add  a  steeple  to  the  house,  provided  £150  could  be 
raised  by  subscription  for  that  object.  In  December,  1792, 
the  building  appears  to  have  been  nearly  finished. 

Previous  to  1780,  Westbury  and  Korthbury  were  indepen- 
dent ecclesiastical  societies  only.  It  was  now  proposed  to 
form  them  into  a  distinct  township.  At  a  town  meeting  in  Wa- 
terbury,  March,  1780,  a  vote  was  passed  to  prefer  a  petition 
to  the  General  Assembly,  at  their  next  session,  that  the  socie- 
ties of  Westbury  and  Northbury  might  be  incorporated  into  a 
separate  town  and  annexed  to  the  county  of  Litchfield,  said  new 
town  to  quit-claim  all  right  to  the  school  and  ministerial  moneys, 
&c.,  &c.  At  the  same  time,  Joseph  Hopkins  and  others  were 
chosen  a  committee  to  meet  and  consider  the  interests  involved 
in  the  separation,  and  to  arrange  the  details  and  report  make  at 
the  next  meeting.  In  May  following,  (1780,)  the  societies,  for 
themselves,  petitioned  the  Legislature  for  town  privileges,  and 
at  the  same  session  were  incorporated,  receiving  the  name  of 
Watertown.  Nothing  is  said  in  the  act  about  school  and  min- 
isterial moneys. 

Jan.  14,  1782,  Messrs.  Aaron  Benedict,  Ashbel  Porter,  Dr. 
Abel  Bronson  and  Capt.  John  Welton  were  chosen  on  the 
part  of  Waterbury  to  meet  the  selectmen  of  Watertown,  and 
run  the  line  between  the  two  towns.  Their  report  may  be 
found  in  the  second  Book  of  Highways. 

In  May,  1740,  forty  individuals,  twenty-nine  of  them  de- 
scribed as  living  in  "  Derby  woods,"  (northwest  part  of  Der- 
by,) five  in  "  Southbury  woods"  (southeast  part  of  Woodbury) 
and  six  in  "  Waterbury  woods,"  (southwest  part  of  Water- 
bury,)  petitioned  the  General  Court  for  society  privileges. 
Those  residing  within  the  limits   of  Waterbury   were   Isaac 


276  niSTORY  OF  waterbury. 

Trowbridge,  John  Weed,  Jonas  Weed,  Joseph  "Weed,  Thomas 
Osborn  and  Joseph  Osborn,  -  They  stated  that  they  lived  from 
seven  to  ten  miles  from  houses  of  public  worship,  with  bad 
roads  to  travel  and  a  river  to  cross,  and  that  they  were  £2,000 
in  the  list.  The  Assembly  appointed  a  committee  to  inquire 
into  the  grounds  of  the  petition.  They  reported  a  boundary 
line  for  the  society  in  Oct.  The  two  houses  disagreed,  and  a 
new  committee  was  appointed,  who  recommended  the  same 
bounds.  Their  report  was  accepted  and  apjDroved,  and  the 
society  incorporated,  May,  1741,  by  the  name  of  Oxford. 

In  the  same  year,  (174:1,)  Oxford  parish  voted  to  build  a 
meeting  house,  and  petitioned  the  Assembly  to  send  a  com- 
mittee to  designate  the  place  for  setting  it.  The  request  was 
complied  with,  and  the  place  selected  was  the  south  end  of 
"Jacks  Hill."  In  May,  1743,  the  people  asked  liberty  "  to 
embody  "  themselves  "  in  church  estate,"  in  order  to  settle  a 
minister.  In  Oct.  1743,  the  clerk  of  the  parish  reported  to 
the  Assembly  that  the  meeting  house  was  "  inclosed ;"  in  Oct. 
1744,  that  it  was  "  being  finished  ;"  in  May,  1747,  that  it  was 
glazed  and  the  floors  laid  ;  in  May,  1749,  that  it  was  plastered 
and  the  seats  and  pulpit  "  being  prepared." 

April  29,  1793,  Joseph  Hopkins,  agent'  of  the  town,  was 
directed  to  oppose  the  application  of  the  society  of  Oxford  to 
the  Assembly  for  town  privileges.  In  October,  1795,  a  vote 
was  passed  to  resist  a  renewed  attempt  having  the  same  object. 
A  similar  course  was  taken  in  April,  1796,  when  still  another 
attempt  was  made.  In  October,  1796,  however,  the  desired 
act  of  incorporation  was  obtained,  and  the  new  town  was  called 
Oxford. 

In  May,  1757,  certain  individuals,  thirty-three  in  number, 
living  in  the  western  pai't  of  Waterbury,  first  society,  and  the 
contiguous  parts  of  Westbury,  Oxford,  Southbury  and  the  old 
society  of  Woodbury,  petitioned  the  Assembly  for  winter 
privileges. t     They  pleaded  that  some  of  their  number  lived 

*  About  1760,  the  following  persons  bearing  lists  were  inhabitants  of  the  Waterbury  portion 
of  Oxford  society.  They  were  signers  of  a  petition  of  the  western  people  for  a  new  society  to 
be  called  Middlebury.  Their  lists  are  annexed  :— Robert  Hale,  £18  ;  Urah  Ward,  £89,  7s.;  Dan- 
iel Hawkins,  £87,  12s.;  Samuel  AVoodruff;  £41,  16s.;  Noah  Cande,  £18  ;  Andrew  Weed,  £21  ; 
Baniel  Osborn,  £31, 10s.;  John  Weed,  £j6,  15s.;  David  Judson,  £8,  8s. 

+  Twenty  of  the  petitioners  are  recognized  as  belonging  to  Waterbury,  fourteen  to  the  first 
society  and  six  to  Oxford  parish.     More  of  them  may  have  so  belonged. 


HISTOKY    OF    WATEKBURY. 


277 


five  or  six  miles  and  the  nearest  tliree  miles  from  any  place  of 
public  worship,  and  tliat  it  was  extremely  difficult  for  tliem 
and  their  families  to  attend  the  worship  of  God. 

The  request  was  not  granted,  and  in  May,  1760,  the  petition 
was  renewed,  this  time  for  parish  privileges.  The  first  society 
of  Waterbury  sent  in  a  remonstrance.  In  it  they  stated  that 
their  whole  list  amounted  to  about  £8,000 — that  there  were 
within  the  limits  of  the  proposed  new  parish  twenty-one  taxa- 
ble persons,  having  lists  amounting  to  £l,28ii,  tJs.  —that  there 
lived  in  the  east  and  northeast  parts  of  the  society,  three  miles 
or  more  from  the  center,  twenty-eight  tax  payers,  with  lists 
equal  to  £1,312,  5s. — and  that  south  from  the  center  at  the 
distance  of  from  four  to  six  miles,  there  were  thirty-six  tax- 
able persons  whose  lists  footed  up  £2,226,  15s.  The  southern 
and  eastern  inhabitants,  they  contended,  were,  in  each  case,  as 
much  entitled  to  parish  privileges  as  the  memorialists,  and 
might  be  expected  to  ask  for  them  should  the  prayer  of  the  lat- 
ter be  granted.  Should  the  society  be  thus  cut  up,  the  west- 
ern, eastern  and  southern  portions,  being  taken  away,  there 
would  be  left  within  three  miles  from  the  meeting  house  [fifty- 
one]  individnals,  bearing  lists  in  the  aggregate  of  £3,117,  4s., 
without  deducting  £1,311-,  -Is.  for  the  Church-of-England-men. 
"Tlie  effect"  of  dismemberment,  the  remonstrants  continued, 
"  would  be  to  cut  us  up  into  mouthfuls  ready  for  the  devourer."* 

*  In  connection  with  the  remonstrance  and  to  confirm  its  representations,  the  names  of  the 
taxpayers  in  the  different  sections  of  the  old  society,  with  tlieir  lists,  were  given.  Here  is  a 
copy  of  the  document.    (The  shillings  and  pence  in  tlie  original  are  omitted.) 

"  Old  Stump  or  Town  Spot  [Town  Center] 


James  Hull, 

£103 

Samuel  Scott,  Jr., 

£03 

Dea.  Thomas  Clark, 

£144 

Andrew  Bronson, 

93 

Obadiah  Scovill, 

117 

Benjamin  Scott, 

51 

Elnathan  Judd, 

47 

George  Prichard, 

49 

Samuel  Barnes, 

81 

Daniel  Barnes, 

23 

Daniel  Welton, 

65 

Ebenezer  Waklee, 

93 

Dea.  Thomas  Bronson, 

91 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

90 

Comfort  Upson, 

14 

Capt.  Thomas  Porter, 

149 

John  Cole, 

•29 

William  Scott, 

41 

David  Crisse, 

33 

Timothy  Clark, 

44 

William  Hickox, 

52 

Lt.  Obadiah  Richards, 

104 

Capt.  Stephen  Upson, 

44 

Samuel  AVarner, 

60 

Abijah  Richards, 

51 

Stephen  Upson,  Jr., 

114 

Benjamin  Harrison, 

Jr.,        29 

Joseph  Nichols, 

53 

Moses  Frost, 

11 

Samuel  Root, 

43 

Samuel  Frost, 

63 

John  Slawter, 

53 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

45 

AVilliam  Rowle, 

55 

Benjamin  Harrison, 

46 

Ezra  Bronson, 

12 

David  Prichard, 

31 

Aaron  Harrison, 

63 

John  Selkrig, 

IS 

Timothy  Scott, 

33 

Elizabeth  Porter, 

17 

Isaac  Prichard, 

51 

Daniel  Ki  Hum, 

45 

Thomas  Upson, 

64 

William  Adams, 

Asa  Scovill, 

89 

Elisha  Frisbe, 

63 

Edmund  Tompkins, 

110 

Ebenezer  Bronson, 

73 

No.  5i. 

£8,117 

Samuel  Williams, 

50 

Reuben  Blakeslee, 

22 

2T8 


IIISTOKY    OF    WATERBURT. 


The  petition  was  not  granted.  A  like  fate  attended  another 
presented  in  Oct.,  and  still  another  in  May,  ITGl.  The  last 
had  iiftj-four  signers. 

In  1786,  the  old  society  agreed  to  pay  for  preaching  the  then 
ensuing  winter,  eight  sabbaths,  at  West  Farms.  In  1787,  they 
appropriated  £9  for  the  same  object.  In  1790,  West  Farms  and 
the  adjoining  portions  of  Woodbury  and  Southbury  were  made 
into  a  distinct  society  by  the  name  of  Middlebury.  The  church 
was  organized  in  1796.  Setli  Bronson  and  Xathan  Osborn 
were  appointed  deacons.  The  first  minister.  Rev.  Ira  Hart, 
was  installed  in  1798,  and  was  dismissed  April  5th,  1809. 
His  successor  was  Mark  Mead. 

In  June,  1800,  the  society  of  Middlebury  petitioned  the 
Assembly  for  an  act  conferring  on  them  town  rights.     Wa- 


West  Branch  three  miles 

[or 

more]   from  meeting 

house.     [These  were  the  petitioners  for 

parish  privileges.] 

Amos  Scott, 

£46 

Benj.  Wilmot, 

£108 

Abner  Monson, 

£35 

James  Bronson, 

76 

Stephen  Abbott, 

82 

Isaac  Bronson, 

140 

Ebenezor  Richason, 

69 

John  Scott, 

39 

Isaac  Bronson,  Jr., 

41 

Ephraim  Bissel, 

21 

Edmund  Scott, 

24 

Eunice  Scott, 

13 

Dr.  P.  [Peter]  Powers, 

78 

Stephen  Miles, 

63 

David  Miles, 

29 

Thomas  Mallory, 

60 

Ebenezer  Lawton, 

10 

Josiah  Bronson, 

163 

Nathaniel  Richason, 

50 

No.  21.                      £1,2S2,  Gs. 

Benj.  Bristol, 

46 

Thomas  Richason, 

56 

East  Branch  [afterwards  Wolcott]  three  miles  [or  more]  from  the  meetinghouse. 

Thomas  Welton, 

£S.3 

William  Cole, 

£9 

William  Monson, 

£13 

Benjamin  Nichols, 

34 

Roger  Prichard, 

96 

Daniel  Alcock, 

48 

John  Alcock,  Jr., 

54 

James  Basset, 

55 

James  Alcock, 

42 

John  Alcock, 

SI 

Joseph  Beach, 

54 

William  Woodward, 

6 

Benjamin  Benham, 

40 

Isaac  Cleaveland, 

29 

Isaac  Hopkins, 

151 

Seth  Bartholomew, 

52 

Joseph  Sutliff, 

g6 

Barnabas  Lewis, 

86 

Joseph  Sutliff,  Jr., 

7 

Shadrick  Benham, 

26 

Abial  Roberts, 

73 

Cornel  Johnson, 

45 

Josiah  Adkins, 

35 

Josiah  Rogers, 

49 

Eldad  Mix, 

22 

William  Hickox, 

53 

Edward  Rogers, 

21 

Abial  Roberts,  Jr., 

2 

No.  28.                      £1,261,  Is. 

South  Branch  [afterwards  Naugatuck]  three  miles  [c 

ir  more]  from  meeting  house. 

Abraham  Wooster, 

£76 

Stephen  Warner, 

£66 

Charles  Warner, 

£47 

Stephen  Hopkins, 

111 

Isaac  Scott, 

44 

Enoch  Scott, 

41 

Israel  Terrel, 

11 

Juhn  Hopkins, 

144 

Thomas  Porter,  Jr., 

84 

Lt.  John  Lewis, 

161 

Amos  Osborn, 

74 

Aaron  Terrell, 

38 

Capt.  G[ideon]  Hotchkiss 

,  174 

Ira  Beebe, 

16 

Benjamin  Tinker, 

29 

Samuel  Lewis, 

119 

Israel  Calkins, 

3 

Stephen  Hopkins,  Jr., 

91 

Samuel  Porter, 

65 

Gideon  Hickox, 

158 

Ebenezer  Judd, 

26 

Isaac  Judd, 

56 

William  Hoadley, 

118 

Simeon  Beebe, 

28 

Gideon  Scott, 

40 

Samuel  Hoadley, 

21 

John  Terrell, 

48 

Moses  Terrell 

52 

Benjamin  Prichard, 

13 

Isaac  Spencer, 

79 

George  Scott, 

25 

Elnathan  Prichard, 

29 

Dan.  Williams, 

45 

Joseph  Pperry, 

31 

No.  36.                     £2,226, 

15s. 

Oliver  Terrell, 

51 

Samuel  Scott, 

90 

HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUKY.  279 

terbiiiy  resolved  to  oppose  the  application  ;  but,  at  tlie  same 
time,  chose  a  committee  to  confer  with  the  memorialists  and 
"hear  their  propositions,"  &c.  The  committee  were  Messrs. 
Joseph  Hopkins,  jSToah  Baldwin  and  John  Kingsbury.  The 
society  was  finally  incorporated,  witli  town  privileges,  in 
1807. 

So  far  as  ascertained,  tlie  first  settler  within  tlie  limits  of  pre- 
sent Wolcott  was  John  Alcock  of  New  Haven.  He  bought, 
]\[arch  31,  1731,  of  Josiah  Eogers  of  Branford,  for  £82,  117^ 
acres  of  land  on  Spindle  Hill,  described  as  in  the  northeast 
quarter  near  Ash  Swamp  or  Potuckco's  Eing,  (in  the  north- 
west part  of  the  present  town  of  Wolcott,)  on  which  he  settled 
with  a  young  family  in  the  same  year.  He  was  admitted  as 
an  inhabitant,  Dec.  13,  1731.  In  subsequent  years,  he  added 
largely  to  his  landed  estate.  After  Alcock,  Isaac  Hopkins, 
(tanner,)  Thomas  Welton,  Eliakim  Welton,  Eoger  Prichard,  Jo- 
seph Beach,  Eldad  Mix,  Shadrick  Benham,  Abiel  Roberts  and 
others  became  settlers. 

In  Oct.  1760,  certain  individuals  living  in  the  contiguous 
territory  of  Waterbur}^,  Farmingtou  and  "  Southington  long 
lots,  on  the  Mountain,"  numbering  twenty-eight,  petitioned 
the  Assembly  to  make  them  a  distinct  society.  They  stated 
that  they  occupied  a  tract  of  land  five  miles  square,  were 
£2,000  in  the  list  and  lived  an  inconvenient  distance  from 
places  of  public  worship.  The  western  inhabitants  were  peti- 
tioners at  the  same  session,  also  asking  parish  privileges. 
Waterlniry  first  society  remonstrated.  They  said  that  the 
eastern  memorialists  (belonging  to  their  society)  numbered 
seventeen  and  stood  £811,  14s.  in  the  list — that  there  were 
twenty-five  of  the  western  memorialists  (embraced  in  the  first 
society)  who  were  £1,360, 13s.  in  the  list — and  that  there  w^ere 
thirty-four  taxpayers  having  an  united  list  of  £2,220,  not  em- 
braced in  either  of  the  proposed  parishes,  who  lived  three, 
four  or  six  miles  southwardly  from  the  meeting  house,  and 
who  were  as  well  entitled  to  society  privileges  as  the  signers 
of  either  of  the  memorials. 

The  remonstrants  farther  declared  that  the  land  out  of  the 
center,  for  two  or  three  miles  each  way,  was  broken  and  bar- 
ren, so  that,  though  the  town  had  been  settled  for  nearlv  one 


280  HISTORY    OF    AVATEEBUEY. 

linndred  years,  the  number  of  those  bearing  lists  living  within 
two  and  a  half  miles  of  the  meeting  honse,  exclusive  of  Epis- 
copalians, was  but  sixty-six,  with  an  aggregate  list  of  £3,669, 
7s.  id.  These  were  the  facts,  they  continued;  and  if  the 
prayers  of  the  memorialists  are  granted  and  two  new  societies 
made,  a  tliird  would  be  asked  for,  embracing  the  southern  in- 
habitants, and  could  not  with  justice  be  refused.  If  the  three 
sections  were  taken  otF,  they  contended,  they  would  be  "strip- 
ped of  almost  all  the  inhabitants  but  those  that  live  within 
about  a  quarter  of  a  mile  of  the  meeting  house."  Such  action, 
"  they  were  of  the  mind,  must  lay  the  foundation  for  the  ruin 
of  tlie  society,  since  the  lines  [spoken  ofj  comprehend  about  all 
the  feasible  land  on  each  side." 

Tlie  petition  was  rejected,  as  was  another  Avith  forty-three 
signers,  in  May,  1762. 

In  Oct.  1762,  tlie  eastern  people,  numbering  thirty-eight, 
renewed  their  petition,  and  the  committee  of  the  old  society 
again  remonstrated.  The  latter  represented  that  the  memorial- 
ists living  in  Waterbury  numbered  twentj^'-one  with  an  united 
list  of  £998 — that  the  west  line  of  the  proposed  parish  came 
within  two  miles  of  the  meeting  house,  "  and  it  might  almost 
as  well  come  quite  to  it  as  it  includes  all  the  inliabitants  that 
way  except  two  or  three  families" — that  "there  were  two 
distant  parts  more  (besides  the  memorialists)  in  this  society,, 
at  as  great  a  distance  as  they  and  each  of  them  bigger  in  num- 
ber and  list  (viz.)  at  South  Farms  numbering  forty  eight  and 
£2,407  in  list,  and  at  West  Farms  twenty  three,  and  £1,418  in 
list."     The  remonstrants  continued  : 

So  there  are  three  several  parts  under  just  the  same  ueed,  and  so  the  whole  so- 
ciety with  £8,000  list  wants  to  be  divided  into  four  different  societies.  [  *  «  ] 
If  these  distant  parts  are  exempted  from  taxes,  the  Old  Spot  would  have  fifty  sev- 
en bearing  lists  and  £3,139  in  list. 

The  tenor  of  the  memorial  leads  to  distraction  and  not  edification,  [  *  *  ] 
and  the  gi-anting  of  it  would  be  as  the  letting  forth  of  waters  that  will  soon  over- 
whelm us  in  ruin  [  *  *  ].  Very  sorry  our  brethren  should  oblige  us  so  of- 
ten to  trouble  the  Hon.  Assembly  with  repeated  accounts  of  our  situation  and 
leanness,  especially  in  such  times  as  these  we  live  in. 

We  [the  committee]  being  concerned  in  making  and  collecting  rates,  have 
enough  to  do  to  keep  from  starving  out  the  gospel,  by  collecting  the  moderate 
sums  granted,  which  is  a  very  difficult  spot  of  work  in  instances  not  a  few,  unless 
we  would  drag  men  to  jayl,  or  destrain  from  them  by  force  what  we  are  sensible 
they  know  not  how  to  do  without. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKY,  281 

I^otwithstandiiig  the  cogency  of  this  reasoning,  the  people 
of  Farmingbniy  (so  called)  were  allowed  to  hire  preaching  five 
months  in  the  year  and  to  set  np  a  school,  and  in  the  mean- 
time to  be  exempt  from  other  society  and  school  taxes.  But 
the  line  established  as  the  western  limit  of  the  winter  parish 
was  not  satisfactory  to  the  first  society.  Their  committee 
complained  that  it  came  within  two  miles  of  the  meeting 
house  and  extended  "  south  as  far  as  a  due  east  line."  They 
prayed  (May,  1763)  that  the  act  granting  winter  privileges 
might  be  annulled,  or  a  committee  sent  to  view  the  circum- 
stances, &c.  A  committee  was  appointed  and  continued  till 
May,  1763,  when  they  made  a  report  and  recommended  that 
the  limits  of  the  winter  parish  should  be  contracted,  the  south 
end  of  the  western  line  being  made  to  run  farther  east.  The 
Farmingbury  people,  by  a  committee,  resisted  this  movement. 
They  complained  that  the  Assembly's  committee  went  beyond 
instructions,  and  prayed  that  the  existing  line  might  be  con- 
firmed, or  that  they  might  be  incorporated  into  a  distinct  soci- 
ety, the  expense  to  be  paid  by  the  old  society.  Sixteen  of  the 
inhabitants,  liowever,  to  be  included  in  the  new  parish  re- 
monstrated against  such  incorporation.  The  result  was,  the 
Assembly  approved  the  report  of  their  last  committee,  and 
denied  the  adverse  petition. 

In  the  spring  of  1767,  thirty-one  petitioners  c»f  the  winter 
parish  requested  society  privileges,  and  asked  that  the  limits 
of  the  society  might  be  extended  into  New  Cambridge,  (since 
Bristol.)  They  said  they  numbered  seventy-one  families,  and 
had  a  list  of  £3,872,  8s.  (The  list  of  the  old  society  was  then, 
exclusive  of  Churchmen  and  Baptists,  £9,854,  lis,  3d,)  The 
petition  was  denied,  as  was  a  new  one  in  Oct,  1768,  with  fifty- 
two  signers. 

In  the  spring  of  1770,  another  petition  was  presented,  bear- 
ing forty-nine  names,  praying  that  they,  the  memorialists, 
might  be  made  a  distinct  society.  The  subject  was  continued 
to  the  Oct.  session,  and  a  committee  appointed  to  view  the 
circumstances.  They  reported  that  ^they  "  found  within  the 
limits  described  about  ninety  persons  that  bare  lists  and  about 
sixty  eight  families,  exclusive  of  the  Church  of  England,  and 
the  sum  total  of  their  lists  to  be  about  £3,900."     The  report 


282  HISTOEY    OF    WATEKBUEY. 

was  accepted  and  a  society  incorporated,  'Nov.  1770,  by  the 
name  of  Farmingbury.  A  year  afterwards,  tlie  parisli  asked 
for  a  land  tax  of  3d.  an  acre  for  four  years.  Tlie  request  was 
granted. 

In  December,  1787,  the  inhabitants  of  Farmingbury  pre- 
sented a  memorial,  in  town  meeting,  giving  reasons  why  they 
should  be  incorporated  into  a  distinct  town,  and  asking  the 
consent  of  the  meeting.  A  committee  was  appointed  to  take 
the  matter  into  consideration  and  hear  the  proposals  that 
might  be  made  "  concerning  public  moneys,  bridges  and 
town's  poor,"  &c.,  and  report  make.  Josiah  Bronson,  Stephen 
Ives,  Aaron  Benedict,  Ezra  Bronson,  John  AYelton  and  Sam- 
uel Lewis  were  the  committee.  "  It  is  rather  a  doubt  in  our 
minds,"  they  rejjorted,  "  of  the  expediency  of  granting  them 
their  request,  on  any  consideration  whatever,  but  more  espe- 
cially upon  the  offers  and  proposals  in  several  articles  by 
them  "  made. 

Oct.  8,  1792,  Farmingbury  applied  to  the  Legislature  for 
the  desired  act  of  incorporation.  The  town  voted,  that  if  the 
memorialists  would  within  eight  days  give  up  all  right  to  the 
ministerial  and  school  moneys,  pay  twenty  pounds  in  consid- 
eration of  being  released  from  supporting  the  great  bridge  on 
the  Woodbury  road,  bind  themselves  to  take  care  of  their 
proportion,  according  to  the  grand  list,  of  the  town  poor,  and 
to  pay  their  share  of  the  town  debts,  then,  in  that  case,  the 
town  would  not  oppose  the  object  of  the  memorial. 

In  the  spring  of  1796,  Farmingbury  was  made  a  distinct 
town  by  the  name  of  Wolcott,  and  Waterbury  "  appointed  a 
committee  to  settle  and  adjust  all  matters  and  concerns  be- 
tween "  the  two  towns. 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY.  283 


CHAPTER    XYIIL 


MR.  LEAVEXWORTirS  MINISTRY:    THE  THIRD  MEETING  HOU^. 

Till  173S,  when  "Westburv  was  incorporated,  all  ecclesias- 
tical matters,  at  present  considered  as  belonging  to  the  society, 
Mere  managed  by  the  town.  At  this  j^eriod,  however,  it  be- 
came necessary  that  these  matters  should  be  nnder  the  exclu- 
sive direction  of  the  different  societies.  As  there  are  now  no 
known  records  of  the  first  society  of  Waterbury  bearing  an 
earlier  date  than  1806,  and  no  church  records  anterior  to  1795, 
additional  difficulties  are  thrown  in  the  way  of  writing  a  con- 
nected ecclesiastical  history.  The  society's  records  were  in  ex- 
istence a  few  years  ago,  and  possibly  may  again  turn  up,  on 
removing  the  forgotten  rubbish  from  somebody's  garret.  The 
facts  which  will  be  given  have  been  gleaned,  in  part,  from 
some  brief  notes  taken  from  the  lost  records  some  thirty  years 
ago,  by  the  late  Bennet  Bronsou. 

The  first  meeting  of  the  first  society  of  Waterbury  appears 
to  have  been  held  JSTov.  16,  1738,  at  which  time,  John  Soutli- 
mayd,  Jr.  was  chosen  clerk.  Xot  long  after  Mr.  Southmayd's 
release  from  his  ministerial  charge,  a  Mr,  Buckingham  was 
invited  to  become  the  minister,  but  he  refused.  In  June, 
1739,  a  "  call  "  was  made  out  for  theEev.  Mark  Leavenworth, 
a  graduate  of  Yale  College,  in  1737,  a  native  of  Stratford,  with 
an  offer  of  £500  settlement  and  £150  salary.  He  was  ordain- 
ed in  March,  171:0.  Towards  his  "  settlement,"  several  per- 
sons gave  by  deed  certian  tracts  of  land.  Thus,  Dec,  1,  1739, 
Moses  Blakeslee,  "  of  New  Haven,"  (then  about  to  remove  to 
Waterbury,)  gave  ten  acres  in  the  undivided  lands  ;  Jeremiah 
Peck  ten  acres ;  Isaac  Bronson  seven  acres  and  a  half ;  Stephen 
Hopkins  seven  and  a  half  acres  ;  Stephen  Upson,  Thomas 
Clark,  John  Bronson,  Tliomas  Bronson  and  John  Judd,  each 
five  acres  ;  all  "  for  the  use  of  the  ministry  in  said  society  in 
settlement."     Soon  afterwards,   Thomas  Judd  deeded  seven 


28J:  HISTORY    OF    "WATERBURY, 

acres,  Joliii  Southmajd  ten  acres  and  Samuel  Scott  three 
acres,  in  the  undivided  lands,  and  Joseph  Lewis  five  acres  in 
"  the  sequester,"  all  for  the  same  object. 

In  17-17,  Mr.  Leavenworth  refused  that  part  of  his  salary 
which  was  levied  upon  the  Church-of-England  inhabitants. ^'^  In 
174:8,  his  salary  was  increased  to  £290  ;  in  1719,  to  £350  ;  in 
1759,  to  £400,  "  old  tenor,"  a  committee  at  the  same  time  be- 
ing appointed  to  inspect  and  graduate  the  rates,  and  to  make 
the  salary  equivalent  to  £150  at  the  time  Mr.  Leavenworth 
was  settled,  which  action,  the  record  says,  was  satisfactory  to 
Mr.  L.  In  1752,  his  salary  was  still  further  increased  to  £450, 
and  in  1753  to  £500.  These  regular  augmentations  of  salary 
were  designed  as  a  compensation  for  the  progressive  deprecia- 
tion of  the  currency,  occasioned  by  the  repeated  issues  of  bills 
of  credit,  or  notes  of  circulation,  to  be  redeemed  at  a  future 
period  by  the  colonial  government.  These  issues  were  com- 
menced in  1709,  but  owing  to  their  moderate  amount,  the  con- 
sequences were  not  serious  for  many  years.  Though  Dr.  Trum- 
bull thinks  otherwise,  the  currency  must  liave  been  a  good 
deal  depreciated  in  1739.  But  this  had  taken  place  so  gradu- 
ally, that  the  effect  had  hardly  been  noticed.  In  this  year, 
the  Spanish  war  broke  out,  and  to  defray  the  heavy  expenses, 
a  large  issue  of  new  bills  was  made.  To  keep  up  their 
value,  they  were  made  a  legal  tender.  As  a  consequence, 
the  old  bills,  called  "old  tenor  bills,"  which  had  been  and 
continued  to  be  the  standard  of  value  in  business  transac- 
tions, rapidly  depreciated,  or,  what  amounts  to  the  same  thing, 
all  other  commodities  quickly  appreciated.  The  "  new  tenor 
bills  "  do  not  appear  to  have  been  employed  inordinary  trans- 
actions, and  the  legal  tender-provision,  by  reason  of  com- 
plaints made  to  the  English  government,  was  soon  repealed. 
Additions  continued  to  be  made  to  a  miserable  paper  currency, 
and  prices  rose  to  an  unprecedented  extent.  A  bushel  of 
wheat  which,  in  1733,  was  in  Waterbury  worth  8s.,  and  in  1740 
10s.,  had,  in  1752,  risen  to  £1,  15s.,  and  in  1753,  to  £1,  18s. 


*  It  will  be  remembered  that  ministerial  taxes  levied  upon  Churchmen  were  by  the  statute 
to  be  paid  over  to  their  own  clergyman  when  they  had  one  ;  but  at  this  time  I  believe  they  were 
destitute  of  a  minister  in  Waterbury.  Consequently,  the  taxes,  which  were  gathered  from  all 
alike,  belonged  by  law  to  Mr.  Leavenworth. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY.  285 

Rye  was  cliarged  in  1733  at  6s.,  in  ITii  at  18s.,  in  1750,  at 
£L,  in  1755  at  £1,  Ss.  The  labor  of  a  man,  in  1753,  per  day, 
commanded  £1,  2s.  In  all  cases,  old  tenor  currency  is  intend- 
ed. "When  the  price  of  an  article  was  to  be  paid  in  specie, 
or  its  equivalent,  it  was  customary  to  bargain  for  "lawful 
money."  About  1756,  the  paper  currency  system  exploded, 
and  the  people  returned  to  the  specie  standard.  In  that  year, 
wheat  was  sold  for  5s.,  rye  for  2s.  6d.,  and  a  man's  day's  work 
for  2s.,  bearing  one  eighth  or  one  tenth  part  only  of  the  nominal 
value  they  had  previously  done.*  These  enormous  fluctuations 
were,  of  course,  productive  of  the  most  serious  mischief. 

In  1755,  Mr.  Leavenworth's  salary  was  £65  "  j^roclamation 
money,"  or  its  equivalent  in  old  tenor  ;  in  1759,  £51 ;  in  1761, 
£65 ;  in  1762,  £82  ;  in  1781,  £55,  but  on  account  of  the  bur- 
dens of  the  society  and  the  public  taxes,  Mr.L.  agreed  to  accept 
£1:5.  Ill  1782,  the  salary  was  £65  and  £10  in  wood;  in 
1791,  £70,  but  Mr.  L.  gave  the  society  £5  of  it. 

In  1792,  in  consequence  of  Mr.  Leavenworth's  increasing 
infirmities,  the  society  appointed  a  committee  to  confer  with 
him  concerning  the  settlement  of  a  colleague.  An  arrange- 
ment was  made,  and  in  March  of  the  following  year  a  vote 
was  passed  to  give  him,  as  a  consideration,  £80  money,  twenty 
cords  of  wood  and  the  use  of  the  parsonage  lot. 

Mr.  Leavenworth  died  Aug.  20,  1797,  aged  86,  in  the  5Sth 
year  of  his  ministry.  A  few  months  before  his  death  he  offi- 
ciated in  public,  and  a  j'ear  before,  as  I  gather  from  the  MSS. 
of  Dr.  Trumbull,  preached  seven  sabbaths. 

After  Mr.  Leavenworth  received  an  invitation  to  settle  in 
Waterbury,  and  before  his  ordination,  he  j)urchased  of  Dea. 
Thomas  Judd  the  Serg.  Hickox  place,  then  containing  five  and 
three  quarter  acres,  for  which  he  agreed  to  pay  £250.  C. 
B.  Merriman's  dwelling  stands  a  little  farther  south,  but  most- 
ly on  the  same  foundation  as  the  old  house. 

Mr.  Leavenworth's  ministry  in  Waterbury  commenced  at  a 

*  The  people  of  Northbury,  In  voting  Mr.  Todd's  salary,  sometimes  tried  to  fix  the  value  of 
the  currency  as  compared  with  silver  or  lawful  money,  though  generally  they  did  not  make  suf- 
ficient allowance  for  depreciation.  Thus,  in  1751,  sixty  shillin£;s,  in  1762,  sixty-eight  shillings, 
and  in  1754,  seventy-two  shillings,  were  considered  as  equivalent  to  one  ounce  of  silver.  (The 
U.  S.  mint  price  of  silver  of  standard  purity  is  $1.21  per  ounce,  Troy.)  In  1755,  twelve  shil- 
lings, old  tenor,  were  to  be  paid  for  1  shilling  lawful  money. 


286  IIISTOEY    OF    WATEPvBURY. 

critical  period.  Until  a  short  time  previous,  the  general  inter- 
ests, secular  and  religious,  were  conducted  in  a  spirit  of  peace 
and  liarmonj.  Now,  however,  various  causes  concurred  to  de- 
stroy this  concord.  Westbury  was  incorporated  in  173S  and 
Northbury  in  1739.  From  the  moment  these  societies  were  or- 
ganized, separate  and  indeed  opposing  interests  sprung  up.  The 
town  foresaw  the  difficulties  and  for  a  time  oj^posed  the  division  ; 
but  at  last  yielded  to  the  necessity  and  propriety  of  the  thing. 
After  the  separation,  tlie  different  societies  regarded  their  spe- 
cial interests  chiefly.  They  even  went  so  far  as  to  nominate, 
in  their  meetings,  town  officers,  Avhicli  were  recommended  to 
the  town  voters  on  election  days.  These  attempts,  on  the  part 
of  the  different  societies,  to  forestall  action  in  matters  belong- 
ing exclusively  to  the  town,  at  last  became  so  annoying  as  to 
call  forth  a  rebuke.  The  town  voted,  Dec.  12,  171:8,  that  the 
nominations  "  brought  in  by  Westbury  and  Korthbury  "  were 
"not  to  be  regarded  ;  it  being  the  proper  work  of  this  day  to 
nominate  and  choose  officers  as  the  law  directs." 

Other  difficulties  grew  out  of  tlie  public  finids.  The  firet, 
or  old  society,  claimed  all  the  ministerial  ]3roperty,  thus  leav- 
ing the  people  of  AYestbuiy  and  I^orthbury  without  re- 
sources from  this  quarter,  (though  they  or  their  fathers  may 
have  contributed  to  the  original  fund.)  The  latter  were  of 
course  dissatisfied  witli  this  state  of  things.  They  also  saw 
troubles  in  the  future  concerning  the  school  moneys.  They 
looked  forward  to  the  time  when  their  parishes  should  be  made 
separate  towns.  Then,  the  old  town  would  assert  her  exclusive 
right  to  the  school  property.  The  discussions  connected  with 
these  exciting  topics,  as  might  be  expected,  were  not  always 
conducted  in  the  best  temper.  Much  bad  feeling  was  engen- 
dered. 

In  1710,  that  wonderful  man  TViiitfield  appeared  in  ISTew 
England,  and  preached  with  amazing  power  in  several  places 
in  Rhode  Island,  Massachusetts  and  Connecticut.  All  classes 
caught  the  enthusiasm,  and  J^ew  England  was  in  a  blaze  of  ex- 
citement. A  Revival  such  as  modern  times  had  not  before  wit- 
nessed was  the  consequence.  With  the  intensity  of  feeling, 
there  was  the  usual  mixture  of  bad  passions.  Great  diversity 
of  sentiment  and  angry  controversy  followed.      Strange  opin- 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUEY.  287 

ions  and  irregular  and  disorderly  practices  sprung  up.  Minis- 
ters forsook  their  pulpits  and  became  itinerants,  and  lay 
j)reacliers  with  more  zeal  than  knowledge  were  common. 
All  took  sides.  Those  who  favored  the  new  doctrines  and 
practices  were  called  'New  Lights,  while  those  who  chose  to 
adhere  to  the  good  old  ways  of  their  fathers,  discountenan- 
cing innovation,  were  denominated  Old  Lights.  Tlie  clergy 
were  divided ;  "  while  the  magistrates  and  principal  gentle- 
men of  the  commonwealth "  were  on  the  side  of  the  Old 
Lights.  O^^pressive  laws  were  enacted  and  ecclesiastical  dis- 
cipline attempted,  but  all  in  vain.  The  excitement  extended 
to  AVaterbury,  and  Mr.  Leavenworth,  a  yonng  man  of  warm 
impulses,  sympathized  with  the  New  Lights,  while  Mr.  South- 
mayd,  more  distrustful  of  appearances,  sided  with  the  Old 
Lights.  Some  of  the  meetings  of  the  New  Lights  were  ex- 
tremely boisterous  and  disorderl}^,  so  that,  on  one  occasion, 
John  Southmayd,  Jr.,  a  constable  of  the  town,  felt  himself 
justified  in  aj^pearing  in  their  midst  and  commanding  the 
peace  of  the  commonwealth.*  .  The  consequence  of  all  this 
was  much  exasperation  of  feeling  mixed  up  with  religious 
zeal.  Mr.  Leavenworth's  ardor  led  him  into  difficulty.  He, 
together  with  the  Rev.  Mr.  Humphreys  of  Derby  and  the  Rev. 
Mr.  Todd  of  Northbur}^,  had  assisted  in  the  ordination  of  Mr. 
Jonathan  Lee  of  Salisbury,  who  was  suspected  of  the  New 
Light  heresy.  They  were  all  brought  before  the  Association, 
and  suspended  from  all  "  associational  communion. "f 

Owing  to  the  general  phrenzy  which  had  taken  hold  of  the 
people,  the  churches  were  convulsed  and  many  of  them  rent 
into  fragments.  The  old  society  of  Waterbury  suffered  great- 
ly. Many,  annoyed  and  disgusted  with  what  they  saw,  turned 
Churchmen.  Among  them  was  constable  Southmayd,  the  son 
of  the  former  minister.  He  was  one  of  the  subscribers,  in 
lT-i2,  to  the  fund  for  building  the  new  Episcopal  church. 
Soon,  however,  he  returned  to  the  society  he  had  left. 

Other  causes,  having  their  origin  in  religious  differences,  con- 
spired to  destroy  the  good  feeling  which  had  previously  prevail- 
ed.   The  Church  of  England  claimed  to  be  the  established  reli- 

*  B.  Bronson'3  Manuscripts.  t  Trumbull,  II,  p.  196. 


2S8  mSTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 

gion  of  the  Colony,  and  the  Congregationalists  every  wliere  were 
declared  dissenters.  Our  fathers  were  provoked  and  alarmed 
by  this  (as  they  deemed  it)  extraordinary  arrogance.  They 
had  crossed  the  ocean  and  subdued  the  wilderness ;  endured 
hardships  and  encountered  dangers  that  they  might  tind  an 
asylum  for  their  religion,  where  they  might  worship  God  ac- 
cording to  their  consciences,  l^ow  they  saw  with  sorrow 
that  they  were  not  safe  in  their  retreat.  The  same  dread  pow- 
er from  which  they  had  fled  still  threatened  them.  Episcopa- 
cy was  spreading  in  different  qnarters.  Several  years  before, 
Rector  Culter  of  Yale  College  and  other  clergymen  in  the 
neighborhood  forsook  their  charges  and  went  to  England  to 
receive  Episcopal  ordination,  no  other  being  considered  valid. 
They  returned  to  this  country  as  missionaries  in  the  service 
of  the  Society  for  Propagating  the  G-ospel  in  Foreign  Parts. 
This  was  a  powerful  society  in  England,  with  ample  funds. 
iSTew  England  was  an  important  field  of  its  operations,  and  the 
religious  disorders  of  the  country  favored  its  action.  Kearly 
all  the  Episcopal  clergy  w^ere  in  its  pay.  The  Congregational- 
ists of  Waterbury  observed  with  apprehension  the  movement 
making  among  themselves  in  favor  of  Church-of-Englandism. 
So  great  were  their  fears  from  this  quarter,  that  they  re- 
quired their  new  minister,  Mr.  Leavenworth,  to  give  a  bond 
for  £500  to  be  paid  to  the  society,  "  if  he  should  within  twenty 
years  from  that  time  [Nov.  21st,  1739]  become  a  Churchman,' 
or  by  immorality  or  heresy  render  himself  unfit  for  a  gospel 
minister,  to  be  decided  by  a  council."  The  course  of  their 
enemies  in  opposing  the  payment  of  the  £100  voted  to  Mr, 
Southmayd,  and  their  condu&t  in  Xorthbury,  showed  organi- 
zation and  determination,  and  proved  that  their  fears  were 
semething  more  than  an  apparition.  Thus  the  elements  of 
agitation  and  conflict  were  at  work  in  all  directions.  For  a 
long  time,  those  of  opposite  religious  views  could  not  agree 
to  differ.  The  doctrine  of  toleration  in  matters  of  religious 
opinion  had  not  then  been  learned.  It  was  new  to  the  w^orld. 
No  living  examples  existed  by  which  its  real  nature  and  practi- 
cal workings  could  be  studied.  All  sought  religious  liberty  for 
themselves,  but  nobody  thought  of  conceding  it  to  others.  At 
last  all  yielded  to  its  advantages  and  its  necessity,  and  peace 


^^^Z/Z;; 


JKcayJ'ru,l,rNT 


HISTOKY   OF   WATERBURY.  289 

returned.      In   174S-9,  Mr.  Leavenworth  was  released  from 
liis  £500  bond. 

Mr.  Leavenworth  was  the  chaplain  of  the  second  regiment 
(Col.  Whiting's)  in  the  campaign  of  1760,  in  the  old  French 
war.  The  following  is  his  bill  for  services,  to  the  colonial 
government : 

To  my  service  from  24  March  to  Xov""  is  38  weeks  1  day  at  £99,    8s.  7d. 

To  my  expense  and  carrying  my  baggage  from  home  and 

one  man  and  two  horses,  2,  lis.  Td. 

To  my  expenses  returning  home  from  Schenectady,  being 

able  to  travel  but  slowlj',  a  man  and  two  horses,  3,  13s.  6d. 


£105,  16s.  8d. 
Mark  Leavexworth. 

Mr.  Leavenworth  had  the  reputation  of  being  what  is  called 
a  "plain  preacher,"  not  having  always  the  fear  of  his  people 
before  his  eyes.  He  doubtless  thought  that  it  did  good  to  stir 
them  up,  sometimes  roughly.  He  had  among  his  hearers  a 
person  of  some  standing,  who  had  the  infirmity  of  sleeping 
(and  probably  snoring)  in  meeting.  Thinking  perhaps  to  cure 
the  man's  weakness,  he  on  one  occasion  stopped  suddenly  in 
his  discourse,  and  addressing  himself  to  the  sleeper,  said — 
"  Wake  up  !  wake  up  !" — ^The.  response  quickly  followed — "  I 
am  not  asleep  any  more  than  you.  Parson  Leavenworth ;  so 
please  mind  your  own  business."  Of  course,  a  great  commo- 
tion followed.  Some  Avere  indignant,  others  amused.  Two 
days  after,  or  on  the  10th  day  of  June,  1760,  the  delinquent, 
Samuel  Root,  was  arraigned,  on  a  grand  jury  complaint,  before 
Thomas  Clark,  for  "  profaning  the  sabbath,  or  Lord's  day,  by 
rude  talking  in  time  of  public  worship,  to  the  disturbance  of 
both  minister  and  congregation,  contrary  to  law."  The  cul- 
prit confessed  that  he  did  talk,  &c.,  and  pleaded  in  justifi- 
cation, "  that  he  had  told  Mr.  Leavenworth  that  if  ever  he 
spoke  to  him  in  particular  in  time  of  worship  to  wake  up,  he 
would  tell  him  that  it  was  none  of  his  business."  The  Court 
looked  upon  the  plea  as  insufiicient,  and  ordered  the  guilty 
party  to  pay  a  fine  of  "  five  shillings  money  and  costs  of  court 
taxed  at  £0-i-02,  and  stand  committed  till  he  comjdy,"  <fcc. 

Mr.  Leavenworth  was  considered  a  benevolent  man,  having 
19 


290  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY. 

a  large  heart  in  tlie  right  place.  He  was  lenient  to  his  poor 
parishioners  wlio  could  not  conA^eniently  pay  their  rates,  and 
was  beloved  by  all.  He  was  in  habits  of  familiarity  with  his 
people  ;  could  pass  a  joke  and  enjoy  one  even  at  his  own  ex- 
pense. A  parishioner  brought  him  a  load  of  green  poplar 
wood  with  which  to  pay  his  taxes.  Mr.  L,  saw  the  swindle 
and  complained  of  the  "  pople."  "  Well,"  said  the  other, 
"you  sometimes  preach  pople."  When  the  new  meeting 
house  was  building,  Mr.  L,  took  a  lively  interest  in  the  enter- 
prise, and  one  day  went  down  to  give  assistance.  He  placed 
himself  astride  a  stick  and  commenced  knocking  out  a  mor- 
tice. One  of  the  workmen,  noticing  his  position,  (which  the 
rules  of  the  craft  did  not  allow,)  approached  stealthily  and 
nailed  him  by  the  slack  of  his  trowsers  to  the  timber.  The 
mortice  being  finished,  Mr.  L.  attempted  to  move,  but  found 
himself  fast.  By  a  stroke  of  the  chisel  he  cut  himself  free, 
but  damaged  the  instrument.  In  a  mock  trial  which  followed, 
the  parties  were  both  fined,  the  parson  being  sentenced  to  turn 
grindstone  to  repair  the  chisel. 

Mr.  Leavenworth  preached  the  election  sermon  in  May, 
1772,  in  Hartford,  which  was  printed.  It  is  the  only  sermon 
of  his  which  I  have  fallen  in  with,  and  is  a  respectable  per- 
formance. Its  main  subject  is  charity.  In  the  course  of  it, 
the  author's  love  of  liberty  comes  out.  He  repels  indignantly 
the  charges  brought  by  the  ecclesiastical  dignitaries  of  Eng- 
land against  the  Puritans  of  America. 

In  17P4,  Edward  Porter  of  Farmington,  who  graduated  at 
Yale  College  in  1786,  began  to  preach  in  Waterbury,  and  in 
October  was  hired  for  a  year  for  £90  and  £10  in  wood.  In 
the  year  following,  he  received  an  invitation  to  settle  as  col- 
league pastor,  with  the  offer  of  £100  salary  and  his  wood, 
with  the  use  of  the  parsonage  after  Mr.  Leavenworth's  death. 
He  was  installed  Nov.  18,  1795.  In  December,  1797,  how- 
ever, in  consequence  of  failing  health,  he  desired  to  be  releas- 
ed from  his  charge.  He  was  dismissed  Jan.  18,  1798.  After- 
wards, he  continued  to  reside  in  Waterbury  for  many  years, 
had  some  difficulty  with  another  church-member,  and  at  length 
removed  to  Farmington,  where  he  died  in  1828. 

Holland  Weeks,  a  graduate  of  Dartmouth  College,  was  the 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBFRY.  291 

next  minister  of  Waterbniy.  In  October,  1Y99,  he  signified 
his  acceptance  of  the  call  extended  to  him,  with  £100  salary 
and  the  use  of  the  parsonage  lot.  He  was  installed  Nov.  20, 
1799.  In  l^ovember,  1806,  he  made  known  his  wish  for  a 
dismission.  The  society  voted  to  unite  with  him  in  this  object, 
but  decided  "  not  to  submit  pecuniary  matters."* 

January  2d,  1795,  the  society  voted  to  build  a  meeting 
house  by  more  than  a  two  thirds  vote,  and  appointed  a  com- 
mittee to  fix  on  a  plan  and  place.  On  the  sixteenth  of  the 
same  month  the  committee  reported  to  build  near  the  old 
spot,  sixty  by  forty-two  feet.  It  was  decided  that  the  house 
should  have  a  steeple,  should  be  covered  the  ensuing  summer, 
and  finished  by  the  first  of  November,  1796.  The  committee 
were  also  directed  to  make  a  contract  for  the  building  with 
William  Leavenworth  for  £850.  To  defray  the  expenses,  a 
tax  was  laid  of  3s.  on  the  pound,  on  the  list  of  1791.  Tlie 
house  was  dedicated  in  1796.  A  bell  was  soon  added,  which 
was  to  weigh  from  six  hundred  to  six  hundred  and  fifty 
pounds,  which  it  was  voted  the  Episcopal  society  should 
have  the  use  of  "  on  all  proper  occasions."  A  new  bell  was 
procured  about  1813,  to  replace  the  old  one  which  had  been 
badly  cracked.  A  new  cupola  steeple  was  added  about  1811, 
the  tall  old  spire  having  contracted  a  vicious  habit  of  leaning 
eastward,  as  though  earthward  inclined.  Its  cost  was  not  to 
exceed  $60.  The  pews,  with  their  high  backs,  (with  open 
work  under  the  rail,)  were  removed  at  a  later  date,  and  slips 
substituted  in  their  place.  The  house  stood  in  front  of  the 
present  residence  of  Dr.  Rockwell,  looking  southward,  with 
roads  running  on  all  sides.  The  growing  taste  of  the  village, 
consequent  on  thrift,  however,  discovered  that  it  had  an  un- 
seemly look  in  its  then  present  position.  It  was  consequently 
rolled  back  to  the  spot  where  the  Second  Congregational 
church  now  stands,  the  lot  having  been  given  by  Mr.  Scovill 

*  The  early  deacons  of  the  Waterbury  church  were  as  follows,  the  date  referring  to  the  time 
of  their  appointment  : — Thomas  Judd,  about  1695 ;  Thomas  Hickox,  about  172-1 ;  Thomas  Clark, 
about  IT-'S  ;  Joseph  Lewis,  about  1710  ;  Thomas  Bronson,  about  1750;  Thomas  Bronson,  2d, 
about  1756  ;  Samuel  Lewis,  before  1763;  Andrew  Bronson,  before  1770;  Joseph  Hopkins; 
Timothy  Clark,  June,  1796;  Stephen  Bronson,  December,  ]797;  Daniel  Bronson,  May,  1800; 
Joseph  Bartholomew,  May,  1800. 

The  early  physicians  of  Wa'erbury  1st  society  were  Daniel  Porter,  Ephraim  Warner,  Dauiel 
Porter,  2d,  Benjamin  Warner,  Preserved  Porter,  Timothy  Porter,  Isaac  Baldwin,  Frederick 
Leavenworth,  Joseph  Porter,  Edward  Field. 


292  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 

as  an  inducement  for  its  removal.  Scarcely,  however,  had  it 
reached  its  resting  place,  when  a  project  was  started,  and  after 
considerable  delay  carried  through,  of  putting  np  another 
and  more  fashionable  house.  The  old  building  at  length 
passed  into  the  hands  of  Mr,  Scovill  above  named,  by 
whom  it  was  fitted  up  for  offices  and  public  rooms.  It  re- 
ceived the  name  of  Gothic  Hall.  Subsequently,  it  ^vas  re- 
moved again  to  its  present  site  in  the  rear  of  the  Second  Con- 
greo-ational  church. 


CHAPTER   XIX. 


EPISCOPACY   IN  WATERBURY. 


The  movement  which  terminated  in  the  formation  of  an  Epis- 
copal church  and  society  in  Waterbury  commenced  at  an  early 
period,  when  there  were  but  few  Churchmen  and  three  or  four 
congregations  in  tlie  Colony.  It  is  stated  that  James  Brown, 
who  came  from  West  Haven,  in  1722,  who  had  probably  heard 
the  preaching  of  Dr.  Johnson  of  that  place,  a  distinguished  con- 
vert to  Episcopacy,  was  the  first  of  that  persuasion  in  Water- 
bury.  At  what  time  Brown,  profanely  called  Bishop  Brown, 
was  converted  to  the  English  church  is  not  known.  Probably 
it  was  not  till  after  his  removal  from  West  Haven.  In  1737, 
according  to  the  Churchman's  Magazine  for  1807,  there  were 
in  Waterbury  not  exceeding  six  or  seven  heads  of  families 
(Trumbull  says  but  two  or  three*)  in  all  who  were  of  the  same 
belief.     In  the  course  of  tlie  year  mentioned,  divine  service, 

*  Dr.  Trumbull  appears  to  have  obtained  his  information  from  a  manuscript  letter  of  John 
Walton,  Esq.,  of  Buckshill,  who  was  an  early  and  influential  member  of  the  church,  and  who  died 
in  1S16,  aged  89.  This  letter  will  be  found  among  Dr.  Trumbull's  papers  in  Yale  College 
Library. 


HISTOKY    OF    WATERBUKY.  293 

for  the  first  time,  "  according  to  the  rites  of  the  church,"  was 
performed  in  AYaterhnry,  by  Mr.  Jonathan  Arnold,  a  mission- 
ary of  the  Society  for  Propagating  the  Gospel  in  Foreign 
Parts,  who  was  at  first  settled  in  West  Haven  ■  as  Dr.  John- 
son's successor,  and  who  at  the  time  was  a  minister  in  orders 
for  West  Haven,  Derby  and  Waterbury.  He  baptized  two 
infants,  both  of  whom  were  living  in  1807,  one  a  respectable 
member  of  the  church ;  and  after  having  officiated  a  few 
times,  removed  out  of  the  mission.  During  the  period  be- 
tween Mr.  Arnold's  removal  and  1740,  Dr.  Johnson,  then  of 
Stratford,  and  Mr.  Beach  of  Newtown,  visited  Waterbury 
occasionally,  preaching  and  administering  the  ordinances. 
Next,  a  Mr.  Morris  was  appointed  by  the  society  in  England 
to  officiate  in  this  and  other  places  in  the  neighborhood ;  but 
he  did  not  like  the  country,  and  soon  (about  171:2)  returned 
to  Europe.  Rev.  James  Lyon,  (an  Irishman,)  another  mis- 
sionary, succeeded  Mr.  Morris,  about  1743.  He  had  charge  of 
the  three  parishes  named  above,  resided  in  Derby,  preached 
one  third  of  the  time  in  Waterbury,  and  after  some  four  years 
removed  to  Brookhaven,  Long  Island,  where  he  acted  as  a  mis- 
sionary many  years.  Following  his  departure  there  was  a 
vacancy  for  a  time,  during  which  printed  sermons  and  prayers 
were  read  by  some  competent  person,  every  Sunday. 

In  1749,  Mr.  Richard  Mansfield,  (afterwards  D.  D.,)  a  native 
of  the  Colony,  returned  from  England  "  in  holy  orders,"  and 
took  charge  of  the  parishes  of  Derby,  Waterbury  and  West 
Haven,  living  in  Derby  and  officiating  one  third  of  the  time 
in  each  place.  While  under  his  charge,  the  church  flourished 
much.  He  is  described  as  a  man  beloved  by  his  people  and 
willing  to  make  any  sacrifices  for  their  good.  "  No  extremity 
of  weather  or  badness  of  roads  prevented  his  visiting  the  sick, 
baptizing  children  or  committing  to  the  earth  the  remains  of 
his  parishioners."*  Mr.  Mansfield  continued  in  the  mission 
till  1759,  at  which  time  he  withdrew  and  occupied  himself  with 
the  parishes  of  Derby  and  Oxford,  with  which  he  was  con- 
nected many  years. 

The  prosperity  of  the  Episcopal  church  in  Waterbury  dates 

*  Rev.  Chauncey  Prindle  ;  MSS.  published  in  the  Chronicle  of  the  Church,  July  0,  1S39.  See 
also  Churchman's  Magazine,  Vol.  IV,  pp.  128, 171. 


294  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 

from  about  1Y40.  In  January  of  that  year,  certain  persons 
"  calling  themselves  Churchmen  "  remonstrated,  it  will  be  re- 
membered, against  paying  Mr.  Southmayd  the  £100  voted  him. 
Their  names,  fifteen  in  number,  were  spread  upon  the  town 
record  and  the  list  is  interesting.     Here  it  is : 

Ephraim  Warner,  Nathaniel  Merrill,  Caleb  Thomson, 

Daniel  Porter,  Obadiah  Warner,  James  Williams, 

Robert  Johnson,  Richard  W^elton,  Thomas  Barnes, 

James  Brown,  Joseph  Smith,  Abraham  Warner, 

Benjamin  Warner,  Ephraim  Warner,  Jr.,  Samuel  Brown. 

[The  above  list  is  copied  ;from  the  manuscripts  of  the  late  Bennet  Bronson. 
There  is  no  record  of  town  meetings  between  Dec.  l^SS  and  Dec.  1740.  One 
leaf,  perhaps  more,  of  the  record  book  is  missing.  It  may  have  been  lost  in  bind- 
ing. The  missing  portion  was  in  existence  some  thirty  years  ago,  as  proved  by 
the  manuscripts  referred  to.] 

In  this  year  (1Y40)  came  the  great  Revival,  bringing  in  its 
train  extravagances  and  disorders.  The  Episcopal  church  gain- 
ed strength  as  the  divisions  and  animosities  in  the  old  society 
increased.  Within  a  short  time,  it  is  stated,  twenty-five 
heads  of  families  were  added  to  their  numbers,  and  they  re- 
solved, in  1742,  to  erect  a  church.  Tlie  following  persons 
were  subscribers  to  a  fund  to  defray  the  expense  : 

James  Brown,  George  Nichols,  Richard  Welton, 

John  Barnes,  Thomas  Osborn,  Richard  Welton,  2d, 

Thomas  Barnes,  Daniel  Porter,  Eliakim  Welton, 

Joseph  Bronson,  Jonathan  Prindle,  Ephraim  W^arner, 

Nathaniel  Gunn,  John  Southmayd,  [Jr.,]  Ebenezer  Warner. 
John  Judd, 

The  town  was  applied  to  to  provide  the  land  on  which  the 
new  house  should  be  set,  and.  the  following  vote  was  passed, 
Dec.  13,  1742 : 

Upon  the  request  of  Dr.  Benjamin  Warner  and  others,  the  town,  by  vote,  gave 
liberty  to  set  up  a  church  on  the  high  way,  north  of  Edmund  Scott's  house  lott 
against  the  apple  trees  in  said  Scott's  lot  by  the  highway,  and  appoint  the  present 
townsman  with  John  Southmayd  a  committee  to  agree  with  the  said  Scott  to  get 
some  of  his  lot,  if  they  can  have  it  upon  reasonable  terms,  that  the  house  may  be 
better  accommodated  and  the  highway  less  incumbered. 

For  some  reason  not  now  understood,  the  ground  above 
designated,  and  Avliich  is  the  same  as  that  on  which  the  pre- 
sent Episcopal  church  stands,  was  not  obtained  or  not  im- 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY.  295 

proved,  and  a  year  afterwards  the  town  gave  to  William  Selk- 
rigg  the  liberty  to  place  a  house  on  it. 

At  another  meeting,  held  April  10, 1743,  in  answer  to  a 
petition  from  those  who  "  were  about  to  set  up  a  church,"  the 
town  "  did  by  vote  agree  that  j)rovided  they  purchased  a  place 
of  any  particular  person  to  set  their  house  upon  and  set  it 
accordingly,  they  might  have  liberty  to  draw  twelve  pounds 
in  money,  old  tenor  bills,  out  of  the  town  treasury  to  pay  for 
the  same." 

A  few  days  after  the  above  grant  from  the  town,  or  April 
20,  1743,  when  the  church  had  already  been  commenced, 
John  Judd,  who  had  recently  become  a  Churchmau,  for  £12 
money,*  conveyed  to  James  Brown,  Richard  Welton,  Benja- 
min "Warner,  Moses  Bronson,  John  Barnes,  Richard  Welton, 
Jr.,  Robert  Johnson,  Jonathan  Prindle,  Nathaniel  Gunn,  Jos, 
Bronson  and  George  ]S"ichols,  and  "  to  others  of  the  denomi- 
nation of  the  Church  of  England,  or  professors  thereof,"  a 
piece  of  land,  "  to  accommodate  the  setting  up  of  a  church," 
described  as  the  southwest  corner  of  his  house  lot,  "where 
they  are  now  raising  a  church,"  being  forty-five  feet  on  the 
south  side,  next  the  main  street,  twenty-eight  feet  on  the  west 
side,  next  to  Willow  street,  fifty  feet  on  the  north,  and  thirty- 
nine  on  the  east  side.  Tiie  church  stood  on  a  line  with  the 
east  and  west  street  near  where  Mr.  C.  C.  Post's  dwelling 
house  is. 

At  this  stage  of  proceedings,  or  in  February,  1743—4,  the 
Church-of-England-men  determined  on  a  movement  to  obtain 
parish  privileges.  Without  such  privileges  they  could  not  lay 
taxes  for  building  a  church.  Before  going  to  the  Legislature, 
however,  they  applied  to  the  town  to  secure  its  good  will. 
The  town,  in  a  liberal  spirit,  resolved  that  it  would  not  oppose 
them  in  their  application.  Their  petition,  signed  by  thirty- 
eight  persons,  came  before  the  Assembly  in  October,  1744, 
and  was  rejected.     Here  is  the  paper  : 


*  It  is  understood  that  this  land  was  a  donation  by  the  grantor  to  the  Episcopal  church,  not- 
withstanding a  consideration  is  mentioned  in  the  deed,  and  this  consideration  corresponds  with 
the  grant  which  had  just  been  made  by  the  town  to  purchase  ground  on  which  to  place  the 
church. 


296 


IIISTOKY   OF   WATEEBUET. 


The  Memorial  of  the  subscribers  being  Professors  of  the  Church  of  England 
and  inhabitants  of  the  Town  of  Waterbury  in  New  Haven  county,  by  their  agent 
Doct.  Benj.  Warner  of  sd  Waterbury,  Humbly  sheweth — 

That  whereas  your  Honours  Memoriallists,  being  Professors  of  the  Church 
of  England,  and  bound  in  Duty  to  carry  on  the  Worship  of  God  amongst 
us  from  which  there  arises  considerable  charges  that  are  Necessary  in  order 
thereunto,  as  building  a  church  and  Keeping  it  in  Repair  with  many  other 
things  of  the  Like  Importance,  Which  charges  (as  we  your  Humble  Memorialists 
think)  could  be  Defrayed  More  conveniently  by  a  Tax  upon  each  person  according 
to  their  List,  as  such  charges  are  in  the  Parrishes  established  by  the  Laws  of  this 
colony,  And  there  being  no  Law  of  this  colony  Enabhng  us  to  Lay  and  Gather 
such  Taxes,  Humbly  pray  that  your  Honours,  in  your  Great  goodness,  would  be 
pleased  to  Grant  us  Parrish  Preveleges  in  Every  perticular  (the  School  only  ex- 
cepted) as  the  Parrishes  have  established  according  to  the  Constitution  of  this 
Government,  and  your  MenioriaUsts  as  in  Duty  bound  Shall  ever  pray.  Waterbury 
April  22d.  1744.* 

Jonathan  Scott,  Stephen  Welton,  Benjamin  Warner, 

John  Barns,  Zebulon  Scott,  John  Judd, 

Gershom  Scott,  Eliakim  Welton,  Obadiah  Warner, 

Gamaliel  Terril,  John  Alcoek,  Jonathan  Prindel, 

Robert  Johnson,  Joseph  Brunson,  Isaac  Selkrigg, 

Thomas  Welton,  Jr.,  James  Browne,  Nathaniel  Merrill, 

Timothy  Porter,  James  Browne,  Jr.,  Richard  Welton, 

Nathan  Hubbard,  Joseph  Browne,  Joseph  Judd, 

Benjamin  Prichard,  Daniel  How,  Richard  Welton,  Jr., 

Thomas  Welton,  John  Browne,  Edmund  Scott,  Jr., 

Nathan  Prindel,  Thomas  Barnes,  Ebenezer  Warner, 

Ebenezer  Judd,  Moses  Brounson,  George  Nikols, 

Dr.  Ephraim  Warner,  Daniel  Porter,  Josiah  Warner. 

This  catalogue  of  names  may  be  supposed  to  represent 
nearly  tlie  entire  strength  of  the  new  denomination  at  the 
date  of  the  petition.  I  notice,  however,  the  absence  of  three 
names  which  were  on  the  paper  of  subscriptions  for  a  church, 
to  wit,  Nathaniel  Gunn,  Thomas  Osborn  and  John  South- 
mayd  [Jr.] ;  and  of  five  names  which  are  on  the  list  of  those 
who  protested  to  the  -paying  of  Mr.  Southmayd  the  £100  in 
1740,  to  wit,  Joseph  Smith,  Caleb  Thomson,  James  IVilliams, 
Abraham  Warner  and  Samuel  Brown.  Of  these  eight,  John 
Southmayd,  James  Williams  and  Samuel  Brown  had  died  and 
Caleb  Tliomson  had  already,  probably,  removed  to  Har- 
winton.     If  we  add  the  remaining  four,  all  Churchmen,  (and 


*  Of  course,  the  Assembly  could  not  grant  this  petition  without  abandoning  their  system  of 
legislation  which  made  Congregationalism  the  religion  of  the  State.  Other  Churchmen  of  other 
towns  petitioned  for  corporate  privileges  with  a  like  result. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURT.  297 

all  of  whom  were  living  in  "Waterbuiy  in  1744,  unless  Joseph 
Smith  is  to  be  excepted,)  to  the  thirty-eight  petitioners,  we  have 
a  total  number  of  forty-two  individuals,  representing  probably 
over  two  hundred  persons,  who  were  "  professors  [or  adher- 
ents] of  the  Church  of  England,"  at  this  time. 

At  what  period  the  church  was  so  far  finished  that  it  could 
be  occupied,  does  not  appear.  It  was  apparently  used  to  meet 
in  as  early  as  1744  or  1745  ;  though  it  was  probably  not  com- 
pleted till  1747,  (or  after,)  in  which  year  it  is  spoken  of  in  a  deed 
as  "  erecting  and  carrying  on."  It  was  a  small  building,  much 
smaller  than  the  Congregational  house,  of  a  mean  appearance, 
with  galeries  above  and  pews  below,  and  a  single  door  next  the 
main  street.  It  is  distinctly  remembered  b}^  our  old  people,  and 
stood  till  after  the  new  church  was  built  in  1795.  By  the 
courtesy  of  the  society,  the  Congregationalists  met  in  it  for 
worship  while  their  own  house  was  being  erected  in  1795. 
The  "  sabba'  day  house  "  which  belonged  to  the  church,  or  to 
those  who  met  in  it,  was  standing  in  front  and  a  little  to  the 
south  of  AYilliam  Brown's  house  till,  say  thirty-five  years 
ago. 

In  the  mean  time,  accessions  continued  to  be  made  to  the 
church.  A  spirit  of  liberality  animated  its  members,  and 
several  important  donations  were  made  to  it.  February 
11,  1744-5,  Oliver  Welton,  a  minor,  with  the  consent  of  his 
guardian,  John  Southmayd,  "  for  £65  money  old  tenor  "  to  be 
paid  by  Dr.  Benjamin  "Wamer  and  others,  professors  of  the 
Church  of  England,  conveyed  to  them  and  their  successors,  "  as 
a  gleeb  for  the  use  of  the  church  forever,"  two  acres  of  land  orig- 
inally John  Welton,  Sen's,  house  lot,  bounded  east  on  Edmund 
Scott's  house  lot,  west  on  said  Southmayd's  house  lot,  &c. 
This  deed  Welton*  confirmed  ten  months  afterwards,  when  he 
became  of  age.     The  land  thus  conveyed,  it  will  be  noticed, 


*  Oliver  Welton,  considered  as  one  of  the  most  important  benefactors  of  the  Episcopal  church 
of  Waterbury,  (the  land  spoken  of  being  regarded  as  a  donation,)  was  a  son  of  John  and  a 
grandson  of  John,  Sen.,  (an  original  proprietor.)  He  was  born  Dec.  24,  1T24  ;  served  through 
the  old  French  war ;  held  the  rank  of  ensign  and  afterwards  of  lieutenant ;  was  in  the  action 
at  Lake  George  and  (according  to  the  Churchman's  Magazine)  at  "the  repulse  at  Crown  Point 
when  the  gallant  Lord  Howe  was  killed."  Of  those  scenes  he  would  speak,  in  his  old  age,  with 
the  greatest  emotion,  till  the  tears  flowed  and  his  utterance  was  choked.  He  died  Nov.  10, 
1809. 


298  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURT. 

lay  a  little  west  of  the  present  Episcopal  cliureb,  March  6, 
1044-5,  Jonathan  Scott  and  Daniel  Scott  deeded  to  the  same 
committee,  for  tlie  same  purpose,  (no  consideration  mentioned,) 
seventeen  and  a  half  acres  of  woodland,  westward  of  the 
town,  which  is  still  owned  by  the  parish,  and  is  situated  in  the 
"Park,"  so  called.  April  19,  1745,  John  Judd,  for  £21,  old 
tenor,  deeded  to  Benjamin  Warner,  Josej)h  Bronson,  and  Jon- 
athan Prindle  and  their  successors,  &c.,  "as  a  glebe,"  six  and 
three  quarter  acres  of  land  northward  from  the  town,  bound- 
ed west  on  the  highway  by  the  common  fence,  &c.  The  land 
thus  described  is  situated  on  the  east  side  of  "Willow  street, 
one  hundred  rods  or  so  north  of  Main  street,  and  is  still  in  the 
possession  of  the  parish.  At  the  same  time,  and  in  the  same 
deed,  Thomas  Barnes  gave  nine  acres  and  fifty-eight  rods  lying 
westward  of  the  old  town  j)lot  lots,  (recorded  in  Book  III,  p. 
326.)*  Two  years  afterwards,  (or  March  25,  1747,)  the  com- 
mittee named  in  the  several  deeds,  conveyed  the  lands  men- 
tioned as  follows  : 

In  consideration  of  £700  old  tenor  money  truly  paid  by  Richard  AVelton  and 
sundry  other  persons,  professors  of  the  Church  of  England,  [we]  do  hereby  give 
and  grant  the  following  parcels  of  land,  intending  the  same  for  the  first  glebe 
lands  to  endow  a  certain  parish  church  in  Waterbury,  erecting  and  carrying  on, 
for  the  better  accomplishing  the  endeavours  aforesaid,  in  great  reverence  and  re- 
gard to  the  Church  of  England  as  established  by  law,  and  her  excellent  doctrines, 
service,  unity  and  order  preferable  to  any  other  upon  earth,  for  the  honor  of  God,  • 
the  surest  peace  and  comfort  of  ourselves,  neighbors  and  posterity,  have  founded 
the  parish  church  aforesaid  for  the  use  aforesaid,  and  for  the  endowment  thereof 
do  by  these  presents  freely  give,  grant,  convey  and  confirm  unto  the  Society  for 
Propagating  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts  the  following  pieces  and  parcels  of  land 
and  buildings  in  Waterbury,  that  is  to  say — two  acres  of  land  with  a  house  and 
fruit  trees,  [here  the  several  parcels  are  described,  all  in  trust,] — as  soon  as  there 
shall  be  a  rector  according  to  the  order  of  the  church  of  England  by  law  establish- 
ed, instituted  and  inducted,  the  premises  shall  be  and  inure  to  the  use  of  such 
rector  incumbent  and  his  successors  as  the  glebe  lands  of  the  said  church  in  fee 
simple  forever. 

Soon  after  Oliver  "Welton's  conveyance  to  the  parish,  a 
house  for  a  parsonage  was  commenced  by  private  subscription. 
Mr.  Lyon  reported  in  1745,  that  it  was  then  in  the  course  of 
erection  and  was  expected  to  be  finished  in  the  fall  of  that 


*  All  the  above  mentioned  tracts  of  land  are  considered  as  gifts  to  the  church  by  the  grantors, 
though  a  specific  sum  is,  in  some  instances,  mentioned  as  the  consideration. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  299 

year.*  The  deed  to  the  Society  for  Propagating  the  Gospel, 
in  1747,  mentions  "  a  house,"  so  the  buikling  was  prohably 
completed  at  the  time  anticipated. 

The  grand  list  of  those  connected  witli  the  Episcopal  church 
amounted,  in  1760,  to  £1,344,  4s. 

The  first  known  record  of  the  Episcopal  societyf  of  Water- 
bury  is  found  in  a  copy,  made  ai3parently  about  1770,  of  a 
former  record,  kept  by  Joseph  Bronson.  It  relates  to  Mr. 
Scovill,  to  his  visit  to  England  for  ordination,  and  to  his  pro- 
spective settlement  as  the  minister  of  the  parish.     This  is  it : 

July  11,  lYoS,  at  a  meeting  of  the  uestry  [or  parish]  uotcd  that  we  would  giue 
Mr  Scouil  twenty  pound  starling  a  year  and  the  use  of  the  Gleeb  prouiding  he  Got 
nothing  at  hum  [in  England]  and  it  was  a  Greed  that  we  should  haue  half  he 
Got  at  hum  —  at  the  same  uestry,  noted  that  we  would  Giue  Him  £22-10  Star- 
ling to  Carry  him  hum. 

Rev.  James  Scovill  was  the  eldest  son  of  Lieut.  William 
Scovill.  His  father  lived  on  the  Abner  Johnson  place,  on  the 
west  side  of  Willow  street,  just  above  Grove,  probably  in  the 
same  house  which  is  now  standing,  and  which  I  believe  to  be 
the  most  ancient  dwelling  within  the  limits  of  the  old  town. 
I  had  supposed  that  Rev.  James  Scovill  was  born  in  it,  (Jan. 
27,  1732-3,)  just  before  the  father  sold  out;  but  the  family 
tradition  is  that  he  was  born  in  Westbury,  (on  Nova  Scotia 
Hill,)  though  there  are  no  traces  of  the  father's  residence  there 
till  Oct.  1733.  James  learned  the  weaver's  trade,  but  sctme- 
what  late  in  life  became  a  member  of  Yale  College,  design- 
ing to  enter  the  ministry.  Before  his  graduation,  in  1757, 
his  father  died,  leaving  him,  by  will,  £200  to  complete  his 
education.  He  returned  from  England  an  ordained  minister 
about  1759,  and  took  charge  of  the  mission,  receiving  from 
the  society  "  at  home,"  £30  annuall}-.  He  preached  one  half 
of  the  time  in  Waterbury  and  the  other  half  in  Xorthbury 
and  jSTew  Cambridge,  (Bristol.) 

With  the  exception  of  the  copied  record  which  has  been 
given,  the  records  of  the  parish,  still  in  existence,  begin  in 
1761.  Here  is  the  first  entry,  followed  by  others  bearing  later 
dates  : 

*  Hawkins'  Mission  of  the  Church  of  England. 

t  It  will  be  remembered  that  the  Episcopalians  were  not  organized  into  a  legal  society  till 
after  the  Revolution. 


300  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUET. 

At  a  uestre  holdeein  St  Jemeses  Church  at  Waterbury  on  the  6  day  of  aprel  1761 
— At  sd  vestry  Mr.  Thomos  Osborn  was  chosen  Clark  by  the  request  [of]  Mr. 
James  Scouel  Timothy  porter  and  John  Welton  was  chosen  Church  Wordens — 
voted  in  sd  uestry  to  give  the  widow  harison  £1-0-0  that  was  Due  from  her  on 
account  of  sum  work  that  her  husband  was  to  Due  to  the  Church — voted  in  sd 
vestry  that  Ebenezar  Warner  should  assist  in  tuning  the  psalm — voted  in  sd  ues- 
try that  Sam' '  Brown  should  a  sist  in  tuning  The  psalm — voted  in  sd  uestry  that 
hezekiah  Brown  Should  a  Sist  in  tuning  the  psalm — voted  in  sd  uestry  that  we 
will  meet  in  the  Church  on  Sundays  and  read  prayers  when  Mr.  Scouel  is  absent — 
uoted  in  sd  uestry  that  Mr.  Scouil  shall  haue  what  is  Due  for  the  rent  of  the  glebe. 

[March  1*7, 1762,  David  Warner,  Abraham  Hickox  and  Eleazer  Prindle  were  chos- 
en societies  committee  and  Timothy  Porter,  Jr.,  collector  to  gather  Mr.  Scovill's  rate. 
The  parish  also  voted  that]  Mr.  Scovell  shall  have  the  foremost  pew  next  the 
Broad  alley  in  the  East  End  of  the  Church. 

March  2'^,  1763,  the  vestry  [parish]  voted  that  they  will  be  at  the  cost  of  a  uestry 
Book — and  that  the  money  belonging  to  the  church  shall  be  laid  out  to  furnish 
the  communion  table  and  to  get  a  choshan  for  the  pulpit  and  other  things  neces- 
sary for  the  pulpit  and  reading  desk. — voted  that  Abraham  Hickox,  David  War- 
ner and  John  Welton  be  a  committee  to  take  cair  of  the  prudentials  of  the  church 
— voted  to  raise  Mr.  Scovill's  rate  this  present  year,  and  to  give  him  1-J  penny 
on  the  pound. 

March  6,  1764,  the  vestry  chose  John  Welton  and  Daniel  Brown  church  war- 
dens, and  voted  Mr.  Scovill  1-|  penny  on  the  pound  for  the  present  year  with- 
out any  deduction  for  the  glebe. 

[April  14,  1765,  the  first  recorded  christening  took  place,  a  vote  having  previ- 
ously been  passed  that  such  record  be  made.  The  name  of  the  child  was  Micah) 
son  of  Noah  Judd — sureties,  Capt.  Edward  Scovill,  Samuel  Scovill,  Sarah  Brown. 
The  sixth  child  christened  was  Amasa,  son  of  Ebenezer  Bronson,  May  12th,  1765. 
He  is  still  living,  aged  92.] 

During  the  year  1765,  the  church  people  in  Westbuiy  erect- 
ed a  church  for  themselves,  which  was  placed  in  charge  of  Mr, 
Scovill.  In  consequence  of  his  new  duties,  his  services  were 
withdrawn,  in  part,  from  Northbuiy  and  New  Cambridge. 
The  next  year  John  Welton  and  John  Hickox  were  chosen 
church  wardens,  and  Mr.  Scovill  was  to  have  a  rate  of  £30 
lawful  money,  annually. 

April  24,  17Y0,  John  Welton  and  Ephraim  Warner  were 
appointed  wardens,  and  a  vote  was  passed  "  that  Westbury 
shall  have  their  part  of  Mr.  Scovill's  services  of  preaching,  ac- 
cording as  their  list  draws,  till  there  shall  come  a  minister  to 
JSTorthbury  and  IS'ew  Cambridge."  At  another  meeting  in  Oc- 
tober, the  vestry  voted  "  that  we  will  pay  £45  starling  as  a 
year's  salary  to  be  paid  to  the  minister  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land  in  case  J^orthbury  and  [New]  Cambridge  provide   for 


HISTOKY   OF   WATEKBUEY.  301 

tliemselves,  wliicli  vote  is  to  continue  in  force  until  the  said 
North  bury  and  Cambridge  obtain  a  benefaction  from  the 
society  [in  England]".  In  1771,  a  minister  was  obtained  for 
these  places,  and  Mr.  Scovill  was  enabled  to  confine  his  at- 
tention to  Waterbury  and  Westbury,  preaching  two-thirds  of 
the  time  in  Waterbur3\ 

April  15,  1772,  Seba  Bronson,  Hezekiah  Brown,  Epha  War- 
ner, Ebenezer  Warner,  Levi  Welton,  Ebenezer  Bronson,  Lem- 
uel Nichols,  Stephen  Welton  and  Benjamin  Benham  were 
chosen  "  Quirresters."  In  April,  1781,  Richard  Welton  and 
others  were  appointed  a  committee  to  repair  and  shingle  the 
church.  April  21,  1783,  it  was  agreed  "that  Mr.  Scovill 
should  have  liberty  to  pull  down  the  glebe  house,  leaving  the 
chimney  and  preserving  the  glass  for  the  church."  At  the  same 
time,  Ephraim  Warner  and  Benjamin  Benham  were  chosen 
wardens. 

After  the  close  of  the  Bevolutionary  war,  in  1783,  the  Soci- 
ety for  Propagating  the  Gospel,  &c.,  withdrew  their  missions 
from  this  country,*  in  pursuance  of  a  plan  which  confined  its 
operations  to  the  dependencies  of  the  British  empire.  Thus  Mr. 
Scovill  was  deprived  of  a  large  share  of  his  support ;  but  the 
English  society  oftered  him,  if  he  would  remove  to  New 
Brunswick,  a  liberal  increase  of  salary,  while,  at  the  same 
time,  the  English  government  held  out  encouragement  to  cler- 
gymen in  bounties  of  land.  Mr.  Scovill  hesitated  long  as  to 
his  duty  ;  but  he  felt  that  he  could  not  support  his  family  on 
the  salary  which  he  had  been  accustomed  to  receive  from  his 
parishes  alone.  He  oflered  to  remain  provided  his  whole  in- 
come should  continue  to  be  what  it  had  been  while  a  benefi- 
ciary of  the  English  society,  but  the  otfer  was  not  accepted. 
His  parishes  had  in  fact  become  much  weakened  by  removals 
and  the  war.  His  people,  however,  seemed  anxious  to  retain 
him,  and  voted,  Nov.  8,  1784,  to  give  him  £55  salary,  "  in- 
cluding Westbury's  proportion,  according  to  the  original 
agreementi"     Afterwards,  Sep.  1,  1785,  a  vote  was  passed,  "to 

*  It  is  estimated  that  during  the  forty-six  years  that  the  church  of  Waterbury  was  under  the 
care  of  the  English  society,  it  received  from  it  not  less  than  six  thousand  dollars  in  money,  be- 
sides liberal  donations  in  books.  [''History  of  the  Church,"  in  the  Waterbury  American, 
Jan.  15, 1S4S.] 


302  HISTOET    OF   WATERBURT. 

have  Eev.  Mr.  Scovill's  services  in  preaching  one  half  of  the 
time  and  to  pay  for  the  same,"  the  amonnt  being  fixed  at  the 
next  meeting,  in  December,  at  £45  [annnally.] 

In  1785,  Mr.  Scovill,  against  the  advice  of  some  of  his 
friends,  went  to  New  Brunswick.  He  did  not,  however,  at 
once  remove  his  family.  For  three  sncce^sive^years,  die  re- 
turned and  officiated  in  the  winter  season  in  his  old  churclA 
It  is  mentioned,  in  the  parish  record,  that  he  was  present  at  a 
vestry  meeting  March  24,  1788.  Soon  after,  he  removed,  with 
his  family,  to  take  permanent  charge  of  his  people  in  Kings- 
ton, Kings  County,  where  he  died  Dec.  19, 1808,  in  the  fiftieth 
year  of  his  ministry.  His  widow,  a  daughter  of  Capt.  George 
]^ichols,  died  in  June,  1835,  aged  93.  (Sabine,  in  his  "  Loyal- 
ists," says  she  died  in  1832,  aged  90.)  His  son.  Rev.  Elias 
Scovill,  succeeded  to  the  mission  in  Kings  County,  and  died  in 
Kingston,  Feb.  1841,  aged  70. 

Mr.  Scovill  seems  to  have  secured  the  respect  and  the  con- 
fidence of  his  people.  Under  his  ministrations  they  contin- 
ued regularly  to  increase  in  numbers  and  respectability  until 
just  before  the  breaking  out  of  the  war  of  the  Ee volution. 
And  during  the  war,  he  conducted  himself  with  so  much  dis- 
cretion, that  though  known  to  be  a  Royalist,  he  escaped  the  in- 
dignities and  the  violence  which  the  Episcopal  clergy  of  Con- 
necticut, with  few  exceptions,  sufi'ered.  He  had  the  courage 
to  continue  with  his  people  through  the  war,  though  it  is  be- 
lieved he  did  not  preach. 

Mr.  Scovill  was  known  for  punctuality  and  faithfulness  in 
the  discharge  of  his  duties.  "  He  taught  his  people  from 
house  to  house  ;  comforted  the  aged,  instructed  the  young, 
and  made  himself  agreeable  to  children — no  despicable  quali- 
fication in  a  clergyman."  "  He  had  a  grave  and  becoming 
deportment,  and  was  sound  in  doctrine."  He  is  believed 
to  have  been  a  good  man,  devoted  to  his  work  and  anxious  to 
do  it  well.  One  of  his  manuscript  sermons  is  before  me.  It  is 
written  in  a  simple  and  devotional  strain,  and  in  that  spirit  of 
kindness  and  benevolence  wdiich  so  nmch  adorns  a  minister  of 
the  Gospel  of  peace. 

In  the  first  years  of  his  ministry,  Mr.  Scovill  appears  to  have 
lived  in  the  glebe  or  parsonage  house,  standing  on  the  John 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBURT.  303 

"Welton  lot.  Afterwards,  he  occupied  the  house  in  which  his 
son  James  lived  and  died,  and  \vhich  stood  where  Dr.  Rock- 
well now  resides.  The  old  house  was  removed  some  twenty 
years  ago  and  is  now  standing  on  South  Main  street,  a  little 
below  the  Baptist  church. 

After  Mr.  Scovill  decided  to  remove,  the  parish,  May  1, 
1786,  appointed  a  committee  to  confer  with  the  parish  in 
Watertown  "  about  getting  a  minister,"  while  another  was 
"  chosen  to  wait  on  the  Bishop  at  Stratford  and  desire  him  to 
visit  us."*  Sep.  25tli,  of  the  same  year,  a  vote  was  passed 
"  to  appropriate  any  money  which  remains  in  their  hands  to 
the  glazing  and  repairing  the  church."  The  next  year,  (Dec. 
8,  1787,)  the  parish  voted  "  to  apply  to  Mr.  Prindle  to  know 
on  what  terms  he  will  settle  among  us,"  ttc. 

After  Mr.  Scovill  withdrew  wholly  from  the  parish,  there 
was  a  vacancy  for  several  years,  during  which  time  sun- 
dry persons  aj)pear  to  have  been  invited  to  preach.  Rev. 
Solomon  Blakeslee  officiated  for  a  time,  and  in  May,  1789,  re- 
ceived a  call  to  settle,  with  a  salary  of  £40  a  year,  "  for  half 
his  services  "  to  be  augmented  to  £45  as  the  list  of  the  society 
increased.  He  declined,  and  afterwards  Rev.  Chauncey  Prin- 
dle officiated  for  a  season.  In  1790,  Rev.  David  Foot  was 
requested  to  become  the  minister.  For  two  thirds  of  his  time,  he 
to  reside  in  Waterbury,  he  was  offered  two-thirds  of  £85  money, 
and  fire  wood.  He  also  declined.  The  society,  in  truth,  seems 
not  to  have  been  in  a  very  flourishing  condition,  and  the  temp- 
tations it  presented  to  a  minister  seeking  a  support  were  not 
great.  Tlie  parish  sought  first  to  strengthen  itself  by  an  union 
with  Bristol  and  Salem  (the  Episcopalians  of  the  latter  place 
having  three  or  four  years  previously  organized  themselves 
into  a  distinct  parish,  thus  weakening  the  present  society)  in 
the  settlement  and  support  of  a  clergyman,  an  arrangement  to 
which  the  people  of  Salem  were  favorably  disposed.  Failing, 
however,  in  their  object,  they  applied  "to  the  Episcopal  conven- 

*  Bishop  Seabury,  then  probably  on  a  temporary  visit  to  Stratford,  had  recently  returned 
from  Scotland,  where  he  had  been  consecrated  as  the  first  Bishop  of  the  United  States.  He  was 
sent  for,  it  is  presumed,  for  the  purpose  of  administering  the  rite  of  confirmation,  not  yet  hav- 
ing visited  Waterbury  with  that  design.  Oct.  1, 1786,  the  record  says,  two  hundred  and  fifty 
six  persons  received  the  rite  of  confirmation  from  Bishop  Seabury. 


304  HISTORY   OF  WATEEBUEY. 

tion,  and  requested  their  advice  and  injfluence  in  uniting  to  tlie 
parish  the  Episcopal  parishes  of  Woodbury  and  Salem,  in- 
forming them  tliat  we  are  willing  to  dispense  with  having  but 
half  the  services  of  a  clergyman,  and  paying  in  the  same  pro- 
portion," At  the  same  time,  they  voted  to  confer  with  Wood- 
bury and  Salem  respecting  an  union,  &c.  But  somehow  Sa- 
lem appears  to  have  taken  umbrage  at  some  of  the  proceedings, 
and  in  order  to  make  amends  a  committee  of  the  Waterbury 
church  was  instructed,  Aug.  29,  1791,  to  invite  the  church  of 
Salem  to  join  them  in  the  support  of  a  clergyman,  "  and  to 
inform  our  brethren  that  wherever  we  have  treated  them  with 
any  kind  of  neglect,  we  are  willing  to  recind  it  and  give  fresh 
assurances  that  we  will  treat  them  with  respect  in  future." 
This  was  satisfactory  to  the  aggrieved  party. 

In  the  mean  time.  Rev.  Setli  Hart,  who  had  been  reading- 
prayers  for  several  months  to  the  acceptance  of  the  people,  was 
invited  to  become  the  minister  "  as  soon  as  he  shall  be  put  into 
holy  orders."  His  salary  for  half  the  time,  his  residence 
being  in  the  old  society  of  Waterbury,  was  to  be  £10,  lawful 
money,  annually,  to  be  increased  twenty  shillings  a  year  for 
five  years,  and  thereafter  to  be  £45,  he  to  have  the  use  of  the 
glebe.  He  was  ordained  the  next  year,  1792,  to  officiate 
half  the  time  in  Woodbury  and  Salem.  During  Mr.  Hart's 
ministry  the  society  flourished.  But  he  remained  not  long. 
By  his  own  desire,  he  was  removed  near  the  close  of  1794  to 
Wallingford,  and  soon  after  to  Hemstead,  on  Long  Island.  It 
appears  by  the  catalogue  of  Yale  College  that  '-'■  Sdh  IlarV 
graduated  at  that  institution  in  1784,  and  died  in  1832. 

On  Mr.  Hart's  removal,  several  individuals  liberally  inclin- 
ed, united  and  bought  his  house  (standing  where  John  C. 
Booth  now  lives)  and  five  acres  of  land,  and  conveyed  the 
whole  to  the  church  forever.  The  old  glebe  house,  from  neg- 
lect, had  gone  to  decay. 

During  the  vacancy  which  followed  Mr.  Hart's  removal, 
Kev.  Alexander  V.  Griswold,  Rev.  William  Green,  and  Rev. 
Tillotson  Bronson  ofiiciated,  successively,  in  Waterbury.  Tlie 
two  first  are  understood  to  have  declined  proposals  of  settle- 
ment. Mr.  Bronson,  after  having  preached  several  months, 
accepted  an  invitation  to  take  the  permanent  charge  of  the 


^^ 


'/r7^  ^^/  /^^A'/-^^^^ 


HISTORY    OF   AVATEKBURY.  805 

parish,  in  December,  1797.  He  officiated  three  fourths  of  the 
time  in  Waterbury  (receiving  $250  annually)  and.  one  fourth 
in  Salem,  and  continned  in  the  rectorship  till  the  enhanced  ex- 
penses of  living  compelled  him  to  ask  for  an  increase  of  salary. 
This  being  denied,  he  felt  obliged  to  seek  a  support  in  another 
field.  He  j) reached  his  farewell  discourse  in  June,  1806,  and 
]-etired  with  the  approbation  of  the  bishop  and  the  good  will 
of  his   people. 

During  the  vacancy  which  followed,  Rev.  Horace  Y.  Barber 
officiated  for  a  season,  and  afterwards  became  the  settled  minis- 
ister.  He  resigned  in  1814,  and  was  succeeded  by  Eev.  Al- 
phens  Geer,  who  continned  rector  fifteen  years.  The  Eev. 
William  Barlow  followed  and  remained  two  years.  The  Eev. 
Allen  C  Morgan  took  charge  of  the  parish  in  November,  1832, 
but  in  August,  1836,  resigned,  and  soon  died. 

The  Eev.  Dr.  Bronsou,  near  the  close  of  his  historical  sketch  of 
the  church  of  Waterbury,  remarks,  as  "  somewhat  singular," 
tluit  "  out  of  near  a  dozen  [clergymen]  who  have,  since  the 
foundation  of  the  church,  officiated  here,  no  one  has  died  in 
AVaterbnry."  This  was  in  1807.  ISTow,  half  a  century  later, 
the  same  remark  may  be  repeated. 

After  the  old  church  had  stood  aljout  fifty  years,  it  Avas 
found  too  small  for  the  convenience  of  the  society.  It  was, 
besides,  out  of  repair  and  antiquated  in  style.  As  early  as 
April,  1793,  a  committee  was  appointed  "  to  agree  upon  a 
l)lace  to  set  a  church  and  the  bigness  of  the  same,"  and 
make  report ;  and  in  September  following,  the  "  question  was 
put  whether  this  society  are  willing  and  think  it  necessary  to 
build  a  church^ — ^voted  in  the  affirmative  by  more  than  two 
thirds  of  the  members  present."  At  the  same  time,  "  Eli 
Curtis,  Esq.,  Mr.  Jude  Blakeslee  and  Capt.  Amos  Bronson 
was  chosen  a  committee  to  set  a  stake  for  the  place  where  to 
build  a  church."  In  the  meanwhile,  the  town  had  appointed  a 
committee  "  to  give  the  assent  of  the  town  thereto  "  when  a 
place  for  setting  "  a  church  or  meeting  house  "  had  been  se- 
lected and  approved.  Unanimity  of  sentiment,  however,  was 
not  yet  attained,  and  Dec.  2,  1793,  the  society  "  voted  to  pe- 
tition the  Hon.  County  Court  to  grant  a  committee  to  come 
and  fix  or  set  a  stake  for  a  place  where  to  erect  a  church  edi- 

20 


300  IIISTOKY    OF   WATERBURY. 

fice  for  said  society  ;  and  also,  by  vote,  nominated  John  "VVoos- 
ter,  Esq.,  of  Derby,  Messrs.  Thomas  Atwater  of  Cheshire  and 
Abner  Bradley  of  Woodbury  for  the  aforesaid  committee,  if 
said  Hon.  Court,  in  their  wisdom,  should  think  Jit  to  appoint 
them,"  Preparatory  to  the  action  of  the  Court's  committee, 
certain  persons  were  chosen  "  to  get  the  minds  of  this  society 
where  to  erect  a  church  edifice,"  while  others  were  appointed 
"  to  view  several  places,"  and  others  still  to  warn  the  people 
to  be  present  when  the  committee  met.  (At  the  same  time,  it 
was  agreed  to  erect  a  fence  around  the  old  church.)  A  stake 
was  fixed,  but  the  place  was  not  quite  satisfactory.  March  17, 
1794,  at  a  parish  meeting,  a  committee  was  chosen,  "  to  apply 
to  the  County  Court  and  the  late  committee,  and  request  that 
the  stake  might  be  placed  five  rods  south  of  the  place  where 
the  stake  now  stands." 

In  Dec.  1794,  more  decisive  measures  were  taken  in  the 
way  of  building  a  church.  A  committee  was  appointed,  con- 
sisting of  Messrs.  Ephraim  Warner,  Justus  Warner,  Heman 
Munson,  Titus  Welton  and  John  Cosset,  to  superintend  the 
work  and  collect  a  rate  of  2s.  on  the  pound,  Feb.  9,  1795, 
a  vote  was  passed,  in  parish  meeting,  that  the  above  named 
committee 

Be  fully  authorized  and  empowered  to  build  or  procure  to  be  built  a  decent  well 
finished  edifice  or  church,  54  by  38  feet,  with  a  decent  steeple  on  the  outside  at 
the  east  end  of  the  same,  and  apply  the  money  heretofore  granted  of  2s.  on  the 
pound  and  all  subscriptions  that  shall  be  made  for  that  purpose,  and  that  the  so- 
ciety consider  themselves  holden  to  said  committee  for  the  residue. 

The  business  of  erecting  the  new  church  was  committed 
more  immediately  to  Mr.  Ard  Welton.  "  And  so  great  was 
the  confidence  reposed  in  his  judgment  and  integrity,  [says 
the  Churchman's  Magazine,]  that  a  contract  was  made  with 
him  to  complete  the  building  according  to  his  own  taste  and 
present  his  bills  for  payment."  In  August,  1795,  the  frame 
was  raised.  The  church  was  finished  with  great  neatness. 
Some  fresco  paintings  upon  its  walls  were  much  admired. 

Additional  taxes  were  imposed  to  defray  the  expenses  of 
the  church.  In  December,  1795,  a  rate  of  Is.  on  the  pound  ; 
in  Dec.  1797,  a  rate  of  eight  cents  and  eight  mills  on  the  dol- 
lar, and  in  April,  1799,  a  rate  of  three  cents  on  a  dollar,  were 


IIISTOET    OF   WATEKBUET.  307 

laid.  In  all,  taxes  to  meet  these  exjDenses  were  paid  to  the 
amount  of  twenty-six  cents  and  eight  mills  on  the  dollar. 
This  single  fact  shows  a  degree  of  zeal  and  self-sacrifice  which 
is  not  of  every  day  occurrence. 

In  October,  1797,  the  new  edifice  was  completed,  and  the 
people  assembled  for  the  last  time  in  the  old  building.  Mr. 
Bronson  preached  an  appropriate  discourse,  in  which  he  al- 
luded affectingly  to  the  solemn  scenes  which  those  old  walls 
had  witnessed — "  On  the  sacred  day  of  rest,  silence  is  hence- 
forth here  to  reign,  and  soon  will  ruin  and  desolation  mark 
this  consecrated  spot ;  until  in  the  next  generation  it  will  be 
unknown  that  here  stood  the  house  of  God  ;  that  here  men 
were  wont  to  assemble  and  prayer  to  be  made."  In  the  pre- 
ceding March,  the  parish  had  resolved  to  sell  the  old  church. 
While  unoccupied,  it  was  sometimes  used  as  a  place  for  holding 
town  meetings.  The  avails  of  its  sale,  it  M'as  finally  decided, 
should  go  to  pay  for  the  new  house. 

Oct.  14,  1797,  measures  were  taken  to  seat  the  new  church. 
A  committee  had  been  previously  apj^ointed  to  act  in  this 
matter,  and  a  rule  was  laid  down  for  their  guidance.  They 
were  to  take  "  the  two  lists  of  1791  and  1795  [on  which  build- 
ing taxes  had  been  laid]  and  add  them  together ;  then  add  £15 
for  every  year,  [the  individual  may  have  attained,]  beginning 
at  the  age  of  twenty  one  years  ;  and  all  those  that  had  no  lists 
of  1791  and  1795  shall  take  the  list  of  1797  and  double  it  to 
make  one  list,  with  the  addition  of  the  £15  as  beforesaid." 
The  last  j)art  of  the  rule  was  intended  to  meet  the  case  of  those 
persons  who  had  recently  joined  the  society. 

The  new  church  was  dedicated  Nov.  1,  1797,  under  the 
name  of  St.  John's  church,  and  consecrated  by  Bishop  Jarvis, 
this  being  his  first  official  act  after  his  own  consecration. 

An  elegant  house  of  worship  being  secured,  an  improved 
style  of  church  music  was  demanded.  The  society  voted  to 
employ  a  singing-master,  "  either  with  or  without  the  Presby- 
terian society,"  and  in  August,  1799,  a  committee  was  cho- 
sen "  for  the  purpose  of  handing  about  subscriptions  to  raise  a 
sum  of  money  sufficient  to  purchase  a  bass  viol." 

According  to  tradition,  the  first  time  the  English  prayer 
book  was  used  in  Westbury  was  on  the  occasion  of  the  mar- 


308  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURT. 

riage  of  a  daughter  of  James  Bi-own,  after  his  removal  thither. 
Dr.  Samuel  Johnson  officiated,  and  in  the  evening  preached 
and  read  evening  prayers  in  Brown's  barn,  parts  of  which  are 
still  standing.  The  marriage  referred  to  may  have  been  that 
of  Elizabeth  Brown,  who,  on  the  10th  day  of  June,  17-1:2,  be- 
came the  second  wife  of  Lieut.  William  Scovill,  the  father  of 
Bev.  James  Scovill. 

For  many  years,  the  Churchmen  of  Westbury,  few  in 
number,  attended,  public  worship  in  the  first  society.  Soon 
after  Mr.  Scovill  came  into  the  mission,  however,  their  num- 
bers augmented  so  that,  in  the  latter  part  of  1T64,  there  were 
twenty  whose  names  are  known,  (to  wit) — Asahel  Beach,  Setli 
Blake,  Samuel  Brown,  Joseph  Brown,  Daniel  Brown,  Thomas 
Doolittle,  James  Doolittle,  Jonathan  Fulford,  Jonathan  Garn- 
sej',  John  Judd,  Koah  Judd,  Asa  Judd,  Jolm  Ilickox,  Joseph 
Ilickox,  Joseph  Prichard,  Eleazer  Prindle,  Gershom  Scott, 
Edward  Scovill,  Samuel  Scovill,  William  Scovill.  These  per- 
sons entered  into  an  agreement  "  to  hold  public  worship  in 
Westbury  on  those  Sundays  wdien  there  was  no  preaching  in 
Waterbury,"  until  a  church  could  be  built.  They  met  in  the 
winter  and  spring  in  the  house  of  James  Doolittle,  and  in  the 
summer  in  a  chamber  of  Ensign  David  Scott.  A  lot  was  giv- 
en for  a  church  by  Capt.  George  Nichols  of  Waterbury ;  and 
an  edifice,  forty-five  feet  by  thirty-six,  with  a  steeple,  (the  first 
in  the  town,)  was  erected  on  it,  in  1765.  Capt.  Edward  Sco- 
vill took  the  lead  in  this  enterprise,  and  in  the  latter  part  of 
October  the  house  was  in  such  forwardness  that  public  service 
was  performed  in  it.  It  stood  upon  the  rocks  by  the  old 
burying  yard  near  the  meeting  house.  It  was  named  Christ's 
church.  The  Eev.  Samuel  Andrews  delivered  the  dedicatory 
sermon.  An  arrangement  was  made  by  which  Mr.  Scovill 
was  to  officiate  every  sixth  Sunday.  This  continued  till  1771, 
when  the  parish  had  so  much  augmented  its  strength  that  a 
new  arrangement  became  expedient,  and  Mr.  Scovill  agreed 
to  give  one  third  of  his  time  to  the  Westbury  parish.  The  so- 
ciety continued  to  prosper,  and  in  1773,  they  finished  the  low- 
er part  of  the  house,  together  with  the  pulpit,  chancel,  cano- 
py, &c.  ;  but  they  never  entirely  completed  it.  Soon  the  Rev- 
olution came,  from  which  the  parish  sufiered  much. 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY.  309 

In  1779,  the  society  received,  by  tlie  will  of  Capt.  Scovill, 
seventeen  acres  of  land  near  the  church.  The  land  was  after- 
wards sold  and  a  fund  established,  which,  with  the  consider- 
able additions  since  made  to  it,  now  amounts  to  $4,000  secured 
by  notes.  The  parish  also  owns  three  acres  of  land  in  the  cen- 
ter of  the  village,  on  which  the  new  church,  rectory  and 
school-house  stand. 

After  the  war,  prosperity  again  dawned  upon  the  church  of 
Westbury.  But  in  a  little  while  the  pulpit  became  vacant  by 
the  removal  of  Mr.  Scovill  to  Kew  Brunswick.  It  continued 
so  till  1788,  when  an  arrangement  was  made  with  the  Kev. 
Chauncey  Prindle,  (a  nephew  of  the  Kev.  Mr.  Scovill,)  then  in 
deacon's  orders,  who  had  officiated  more  or  less,  as  lay-reader, 
at  a  salary  of  thirty  pounds,  "to  be  paid  in  beef,  pork,  butter, 
tallow,  wool,  flax,  or  any  sort  of  grain."  He  was  ordained  as 
priest  by  Bishop  Seabury  on  the  2itli  of  the  month.  He 
gave  part  of  his  time  to  Northbury,  but  resided  in  Westbury. 

In  1792,  the  society,  having  increased  greatly  in  numbers, 
determined  to  erect  a  new  church  in  a  more  desirable  situa- 
tion. It  was  "raised"  August,  1793,  and  consecrated  by 
Bishop  Seabury  as  Christ's  Church,  Nov.  18,  1794.  It  was 
placed  on  ground  confronting  the  spot  occupied  by  the  pre- 
sent chnrcli.  A  "Commemorative  Discourse"  was  delivered 
in  it,  for  the  last  time,  Oct.  28,  1855,  by  the  Rev.  Horace  H. 
Reid,  the  rector,  which  was  published,  and  to  which  I  am  in- 
debted for  some  facts  contained  in  this  sketch. 

Mr.  Prindle  continued  rector  till  1804,  when  he  resigned. 
His  farewell  discourse  was  preached  on  the  23d  of  December. 
He  is  described  as  a  most  worthy  and  indefatigable  man.  As 
an  instance  of  his  punctuality  in  the  discharge  of  duty,  it  is 
stated  that  on  a  certain  important  occasion,  when  he  was  to 
preach  in  Waterbury,  he  found  the  Naugatuck  much  swollen 
by  a  flood.  He  saw  his  horse  must  swim  the  stream,  or  he 
must  fail  in  his  appointment.  Preferring  the  former  al- 
ternative, he  plunged  in. — He  was  a  son  of  Eleazer  and  Anna 
(Scovill)  Prindle;  was  born  July  13,  1753,  and  graduated  at 
Yale  College  in  1776.  After  he  left  Watertown,  he  was,  for 
several  years,  rector  of  the  churches  of  Oxford  and  Salem. 
He  died  in  1833.     He  left  some  manuscripts  relating  to  the 


310  HISTORY    OF    WATEKBUKY. 

cliiirclies  of  Westbuiy  and  Korthbuiy,  whicli  were  publislied 
in  the  Chronicle  of  the  Church,  July  20,  1839,  from  which  I 
have  gleaned  many  facts. 

Episcopacy  in  Korthbury  grew  out  of  the  extravagances 
which  attended  the  Revival  of  ]  7iO.  Mr,  Todd's  course  was 
denounced  by  some  of  his  people  as  irregular  and  unauthor- 
ized. Ilis  evening  meetings,  it  is  said,  were  disorderly  in  the 
extreme.  Incpiiry  began  to  be  made  whether  there  was  not 
another  and  better  way  of  serving  God.  At  this  period,  a  prayer 
book,  owned  by  one  of  Mr.  Todd's  parishioners,  came  to  light. 
It  was  the  first  that  appeared  in  Korthbury,  and  was  the  prop- 
erty of  Thomas  Blakeslee's  wife.  Certain  people  often  met 
together  to  consult  it.  Mr.  Todd  disapproved  of  these  proceed- 
ings, and,  according  to  tradition,  told  those  who  studied  the 
strange  book  that  if  they  did  not  desist  they  would  go  to  a  bad 
place !  Thus  matters  went  on,  the  Churchmen  gaining 
strength,  till  at  last  they  came  to  control  a  majority  of  the 
votes.  They  then  numbered  eleven  and  took  possession  of 
the  house  in  which  public  worship  was  held,  voting  Mr. 
Todd's  meetings  out.  While  they  did  this,  however,  they  as- 
sured the  minority  that  they  would  assist  to  build  them  ano- 
ther house  to  an  extent  equal  to  their  (the  minority's)  interest 
in  the  old  one.  This  promise,  it  is  affirmed,  was  faithfully  kept, 
and  to  the  satisfaction,  pecuniarily,  of  the  Congregationalists. 
Some  of  the  majority,  however,  disapproved  of  this  whole 
proceeding,  and  admitted  that  the  minority  were  not  fairly 
treated.*  The  latter  might  have  been  permitted  to  occupy 
the  house  when  not  wanted  by  the  other  party.  But  it  was 
a  time  of  excitement,  and  a  spirit  of  conciliation  among  rival 
sects  is  a  rare  virtue. 

It  is  difficult  to  say  who  were  the  "  eleven"  first  Churchmen 
(heads  of  families)  of  Northbury.  Among  them,  however, 
were  some  prominent  men.  The  following  persons  joined  them- 
selves at  an  early  date  to  the  new  donomination,  (to  wit,) 
Barnabas  Ford,  Thomas  Blakeslee,  David  Blakeslee,  Lieut. 
John  Bronson,   and    probaly  Samuel    Cole,   Ebenezer  Ford, 


*  Manuscript  letter  from  Noah  M.  Bronson  of  Medina,  Ohio,  formerly  a  prominent  Church- 
man of  Plymouth. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  311 

Abel  Ford,  and  Ebenezer  Allen.  At  what  precise  time  tlie 
famous  eleven  organized  themselves  and  appropriated  for 
their  own  use  the  old  meeting  house,  it  is  not  safe  to  affirm. 
The  Congregationalists,  however,  contemplated  buildiug  a 
new  house  as  early  as  Oct.  1740,  possibly,  before  their  exclu- 
sion from  the  old  building. 

For  a  considerable  period,  the  Episcopalians  of  Xorthbury 
could  have  had  but  occasional  and  rare  visits  from  a  clergy- 
man. They  were  dependent  on  the  ministers  who  officiated 
in  "Waterbury,  and  who  were  in  the  service  of  the  society  for 
Propagating  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts.  Eev.  Theophilus 
Morris  was  in  the  mission  from  1740  to  1743.  He  procured 
from  the  parent  society  a  large  folio  Bible  and  prayer  book  for 
the  uses  of  the  churches  of  Derby,  Waterbury,  West  Haven  and 
Northbury.  Mr.  Lyon  followed  Mr.  Morris,  Dr.  Mansfield  of 
Derby,  Mr.  Lyon,  and  Kev.  James  Scovill,  (about  1759,)  Dr. 
Mansfield,  as  is  mentioned  in  my  account  of  the  church  in 
AVaterbury.  Mr.  Scovill's  services  were  relinquished  for  a 
stipulated  sum  ;  and  in  1773,  Rev.  James  Nichols,*  lately  re- 
turned from  England,  where  he  had  been  for  ordination,  took 
charge  of  the  churches  of  Northbury  and  New  Cambridge, 
(now  Bristol,)  officiating  alternately  half  the  time  in  each,  but 
residing  in  the  latter  place.  In  consequence  of  the  war,  Mr. 
Nichols  remained  but  two  years  and  removed  to  Litchfield. 
After  this  and  till  the  close  of  the  Eevolution,  the  church  was 
in  an  unsettled  state  and  without  the  services  of  an  ordained 
minister.  Whilst  the  war  lasted,  it  is  not  known  that  public 
services  of  any  kind  were  held  in  the  parish. 

Soon  after  the  organization  of  the  church,  several  of  the 
members  raised  among  themselves  £100  as  the  foundation  for 
a  church  fund.  This  sum  was  invested  in  land  and  deeded  as 
follows : 

I  Baruabas  Ford,  [&c.]  in  consideration  of  one  hundred  pounds  money  con- 
tributed to  me  by  my  neighbors,  members  of  the  Church  of  England,  by  and  with 
their  advice,  [&c.]  for  the  first  glebe  lands  to  endow  the  said  church  in  North- 
bury,  [&c.]  do  give,  grant,  convey  and  confirm  unto  the  Society  for  the  Propagation 


*  Was  he  not  the  son  of  James  Nichols,  (of  Waterbury,)  who  was  born  in  December,  1748,  and 
graduated  at  Yale  College,  in  1771  ? 


312  HISTOKY    OF   WATEEBUEY. 

of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign  Parts,*  one  piece  of  land  containing  forty  acres  being  and 
lying  in  said  Northbury  eastward  from  the  church,  it  being  the  west  end  of  the 

farm  that  belonged  to  Thomas  Clark  of  Waterbury to  have  and  to  hold  [&c.], 

but  in  trust  and  for  this  special  purpose,  that  is  to  say,  as  soon  as  there  shall  be  a 
rector  instituted  and  inducted,  [&c.]  the  premises  shall  then  be  and  inure  to  such 
rector  incumbent  and  to  his  successors  for  his  and  their  use  as  the  glebe  lands  of 
the  said  church  for  ever,  [&c.] 

This  deed  is  dated  Nov.  21,  1Y45,  and  witnessed  by  Thomas 
Blakeslee,  Samuel  Cole  and  Ebenezer  Ford. 

After  tlie  war,  in  October,  1784,  a  movement  was  made  by 
the  church  to  organize  themselves  into  a  society  "  according 
to  an  act  of  the  General  Assembly."  A  warrant  was  is- 
sued by  a  justice  of  the  peace,  calling  a  meetiag  and.  di- 
recting that  all  the  legal  voters  of  the  society  be  warned  to 
meet  at  "  the  church  house  "  on  the  eighteenth  of  the  month, 
and  to  choose  a  moderator,  etc.  The  roll  of  voting  members 
at  this  time  is  recorded.  They  numbered  67,  showing  a 
strength  hardly  to  be  expected  so  soon  after  the  war.  At  this 
first  formal  meeting  of  the  parish,  Lieut.  Eliphalet  Hartshorn 
was  chosen  moderator,  Jude  Blakeslee  clerk  and  treasurer, 
and  Mr.  Asher  Blakeslee,  Capt.  Amos  Brouson  and  Mr. 
Isaac  Fenn,  prudential  committee,  with  power  to  employ  Mr. 
Baldwin  or  some  other  minister  as  a  candidate  for  settlement. 
At  this  time,  15  persons  living  in  the  town  of  Litchfield  attend- 
ed the  Northbury  church. 

At  a  subsequent  meeting  in  December,  a  tax  of  two  pence' 
on  the  pound  was  laid,  (Jacob  Potter,  collector,)  which  was  re- 
newed from  year  to  year.  Unwearied  endeavors  were  put 
forth  to  obtain  a  rector,  for  a  time  without  success.  The  Kev. 
Ashbel  Baldwin,  the  Eev.  Philo  Shelton,  and  the  Rev.  Tillot- 
son  Bronson,  officiated  occasionally.  After  his  ordination  as  a 
deacon,  in  June,  1787,  the  Kev.  Chauncey  Prindle  ofiiciated 
regularly  for  a  time.  He  was  afterwards  settled,  the  articles 
of  agreement  bearing  date  Feb.  12,  1788,  twelve  days  before 
his  admission  to  the  order  of  the  priesthood.  By  the  articles, 
the  parish  agreed  to  give  him  £37,  10s.  lawful  money  for  half 

*  The  reason  for  conveying  the  land  to  the  English  society  may  probably  be  found  in  the  fact 
that  the  Episcopal  churches  of  Connecticut  were  not  at  that  time  legally  constituted  bodies,  and 
could  not  hold  property  in  a  corporate  capacity.  The  lands  conveyed  In  this  manner  to 
the  society,  appear  never  to  have  been  reconveyed  to  the  parishes.  At  any  rate,  I  can  find  no 
such  reconveyances  on  the  Waterbury  records.  After  the  Revolution,  the  English  society,  be- 
ing alien,  could  not,  I  suppose,  give  a  title.    A  title  was  at  last  probably  chained  by  possession- 


HISTORY   OF  WATERBURY.  813 

of  tlie  time,  "  to  be  paid  in  produce,  siicli  as  beef,  pork,  butter, 
tallow,  sheep's  avooI,  flax  or  any  sort  of  grain,  with  a  suitable 
proportion  of  each  kind."  A  rate  of  three  pence  on  the  pound 
was  imposed  in  December  to  pay  the  minister''s  salary,  which 
the  next  year  was  raised  to  four  pence. 

About  four  years  after  Mr.  Prindle's  settlement,  the  parish 
was  much  weakened  by  the  formation  of  St.  Matthew's  church, 
on  the  eastern  border  of  ]^orthbury,  and  by  certain  persons 
joining  themselves  to  the  church  in  ]S[orthfleld,  (Litchfield.) 
These  raoYements  originated,  not  in  a  want  of  harmony,  but  in 
a  desire  to  promote  personal  convenience. 

The  old  "  church  house  "  had  become  rickety  and  uncom- 
fortable, particularly  in  wet  weather,  and  in  December,  1789, 
a  vote  was  taken  to  make  some  repairs.  In  January,  1790, 
however,  it  was  resolved  to  build  a  new  church.  But  there 
were  much  embarrassment  and  delay  in  consequence  of  a 
difterence  of  opinion  as  to  the  location  and  the  manner  of  rais- 
ing the  necessary  funds.  Some  w^anted  the  new  edifice  in  the 
hollow,  others  on  the  hill.  By  the  persevering  efibrts  of  Mr, 
Prindle  and  others,  the  obstacles  at  length  were  all  removed. 
It  was  agreed  that  the  house  should  be  placed  on  the  hill 
"  near  the  north  east  corner  of  the  green  or  place  of  parade," 
and  be  adorned  with  a  steeple.  It  seems  to  have  been  com- 
menced early  in  1Y9-1,  under  the  superintendence  of  Messrs.  Da- 
vid Shelton,  Xoah  M.  Bronson,  Selah  Seymour,  Samuel  Potter 
and  Adna  Blakeslee,  building  committee.  After  the  frame 
had  been  erected  and  covered,  another  committee,  consisting 
of  Koah  M.  Bronson,  David  M.  Shelton  and  Amos  Ford,  was 
chosen  to  complete  the  building.  Eli  Barnes  was  at  the  next 
meeting  placed  on  the  committee  in  the  place  of  Amos  Ford. 
The  church  was  to  be  finished  "in  a  decent  and  elegant  man- 
ner." It  was  so  far  completed  by  the  14th  day  of  JSTovember, 
1796,  that  a  vote  was  taken  to  seat  it ;  and  on  the  24:th.  of  the 
same  month  the  people  assembled  in  it  for  the  first  time  for 
public  worship.  The  taxes  levied  to  defray  the  expenses  of 
building,  amounted,  it  is  said,  to  thirty-five  cents  on  a  dollar, 
to  say  nothing  of  voluntary  contributions.  The  church  was 
consecrated  Kov.  2,  1797,  by  Bishop  Jarvis,  by  the  name  of  St. 
Peter's  church,  the  Rev.  Philo  Shelton  preaching  the  sermon. 


314  HISTOEY    OF   WATEEBUEY. 

On  Easter  Moiidaj,  1S06,  Mr.  Prindle  proposed  to  resign 
ills  cliarge,  in  order  to  afford  the  society  an  opportunity  to 
strengthen  itself  by  an  union  with  a  neighboring  church.  His 
proposal  was  acceded  to,  and  a  connection  Avas  formed  be- 
tween St.  Peter's  and  St.  Matthew's  churches. 

After  Mr.  Prindle  retired  from  the  parish,  the  Rev.  Nathan 
B.  Burgess  and  the  Eev.  Joseph  D.  Welton  officiated  for  a 
time,  the  latter  as  lay  reader;  but  no  permanent  rector  was 
secured  till  1809,  when  an  arrangement  was  made  with 
the  Rev.  Roger  Searle.  The  articles  of  settlement  bear  date 
Nov.  IStli.  Mr.  Searle  was  settled  over  the  parishes  of  St. 
Peter's  and  St.  Matthew's,  and  was  to  receive  $450  and  30 
cords  of  good  fire  wood  per  annum.  In  consideration  of  the 
rector's  residence  being  in  St.  Peter's  parish,  that  parish  was 
to  supply  all  the  wood,  and  retain  the  use  of  its  glebe  lands. 
The  remainder  of  the  salary  was  paid  in  the  proportion  of 
services  received. 

An  addition  was  made  to  the  funds  of  the  society,  in  1813, 
by  subscription  of  one  thousand  dollars,  Mr.  Searle  to  have 
the  benefit  of  it  during  his  rectorship.  The  subscribers'  names 
are  entered  upon  the  record,  twenty -nine  in  number.  Elijah 
Warner  gave  one  quarter  of  the  sum.  A  few  years  later, 
(1821,)  the  same  individual  gave  to  the  parish  four  acres  of 
land,  valued  at  about  $400,  on  which  he  and  others  erected  a 
dwelling  for  the  rector. 

In  consecpience,  chiefly,  of  a  large  emigration  to  the  West 
and  the  weakening  of  the  parish',  Mr.  Searle  resigned  his  charge 
ill  1817,  the  connection  being  dissolved  Sept.  16th. 

The  Rev.  Rodney  Rossiter  succeeded  to  the  rectorship  in 
1818,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Burhans  in  1832,  and  the  Rev.  William 
Watson  in  1837.  The  Rev.  S.  K.  Miller  is  the  present 
rector."" 

*  In  the  preparation  of  the  preceding  account  of  Episcopacy  in  Northbur3',  I  have  consulted, 
besides  the  parish  records,  An  Account  of  St.  Peter's  Church,  Plymouth,  printed  in  the  Episco- 
pal Watchman,  October,  1S27  ;  the  Rev.  Mr.  Prindle's  MSS.  published  in  the  Chronicle  of  the 
Church,  1?39,  and  a  Centennial  Sermon,  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Watson,  delivered  Jan.  1,  1S4S,  and 
published. 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBUET.  315 


CHAP  TEE    XX. 


CHURCH   AND   STATE:   SLAVERY:    OLD   FRENCH   WAR. 

CoxGREGATio^^ALisM  wRs  establislicd  by  law  in  the  Colony  of 
Connecticut.  In  opposition  to  this  there  could  be  "  no  minis- 
try or  church  administration  entertained  or  attended  by  the 
inhabitants  of  any  town  or  plantation  [ttc]  upon  penalty  of 
the  forfeiture  of  five  pounds  for  every  breach  of  this  act." 
Against  some  species  of  dissent,  the  laws  were  very  stringent. 
"  Quakers,  Ranters,  Adamites,  or  such  like,"  were  to  be  com- 
mitted to  prison  or  sent  out  of  the  Colony.  Ko  individual 
could  "  unnecessarily  entertain  "  "or  speak  more  or  less  with  " 
such  persons  on  penalty  of  five  pounds,  and  the  town  that  al- 
lowed entertainment  to  be  given  them  must  also  pay  five 
pounds  per  week.  Quaker  books  were  ordered  to  be  seized  by 
the  constable,  and  the  persons  in  whose  possession  they  were 
found  were  to  be  fined  ten  shillings  each.  Every  j^erson  in 
the  Colony  was  obliged  to  pay  taxes  for  the  support  of  the  es- 
tablished religion.  K  a  town  saw  fit  to  go  without  a  minister 
for  a  time,  a  statute  (which  was  continued  till  after  the  Revo- 
lution) provided  that  a  tax  should,  notwithstanding,  be  levied, 
"  as  if  there  were  a  minister  there,"  the  avails  to  be  reserved 
"  for  the  suj)port  of  the  ministry  of  that  town  "  in  the  future, 
according  to  the  discretion  of  the  County  Court. "^ 

The  ministers  of  religion  were  the  especial  favorites  of  the 
colonial  government.  Their  polls  and  estates  were  exempted 
from  taxation,  and  stringent  laws  were  made  to  secure  them 
the  advantages  of  their  position  and  the  respect  of  their  flocks. 
It  was  provided  that  "  if  any  Christian,  so  called,  should  con- 

*  As  an  example  of  the  almost  absolute  power  which  the  Assembly  exercised  over  the  towns 
and  individuals  in  matters  of  religion,  I  may  refer  to  a  case,  one  of  a  class. — After  the  death  of 
Mr.  Hooker  in  1697,  Farmington,  owing  to  discordant  sentiments,  was  for  a  season  without  a 
minister.  On  application,  the  Court,  in  1702,  ordered  the  people  to  seek  counsel  and  help  of 
Rev.  Mr.  Abram  Pierson  and  five  others,  and  "  to  entertain  "  and  pay  for  one  year  the  minister 
which  they,  "  the  reverend  elders,"  should  nominate  and  appoint.  At  this  period  the  town  oiii- 
cers  of  Farmington  were  appointed  by  the  Assembly. — [Historical  Discourse  by  Rev.  Noah  Porter, 
Jr.,  1841.] 


316  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 

teinptiionslj  behave  liimself  towards  the  word  preached  or 
the  messengers  thereof,"  he  should,  for  the  first  offense,  be  re- 
proved openlj,  in  some  public  assembly,  by  the  magistrate  ; 
and  for  the  second,  should  pay  a  fine  of  five  pounds,  "  or  else 
stand  two  hours  openly  upon  a  block  or  stool  four  foot  high, 
on  a  public  meeting  day,  with  a  paper  fixed  on  his  breast 
written  with  capital  letters  : — an  open  and  obstinate  con- 
temner OF  god's  hoi.y  ordinances  :  tliat  others  may  fear  and 
be  ashamed." 

At  an  early  period,  almost  all  the  educated  men  entered  the 
ministry.  Lawyers  were  not  wanted,  and  doctors  were  self- 
taught  or,  oftener,  untaught.  Clergymen  trained  the  youth. 
They  were  universally  deferred  to  as  a  superior  order  of  men 
wdiose  displeasure  it  would  not  be  safe  to  incur.  On  Sundays 
they  were  treated  with  special  reverence.  "  When  the  minister 
passed  from  the  threshold  to  the  pulpit,  tlie  people  rose ;  and 
if  he  formally  addressed  them  in  any  part  of  the  sermon, 
those  in  the  galleries,  in  obedience  to  parental  injunction  and 
usage,  in  many  places,  stood  and  continued  standing  till  the 
address' w^as  concluded."* 

In  1706,  the  law  against  the  Quakers  was  repealed;  and  in 
1T08,  by"An  Act  for  the  case  of  such  as  soberly  dissent," 
persons  were  jDermitted,  on  certain  conditions,  to  worship  "  in 
a  way  sejDarate  from  that  which  is  by  law  established,"  without 
molestation ;  but  nobody  was  excused  from  paying  taxes  to 
the  "  established  church." 

When  Episcopal  churches  began  to  be  established  in  Con- 
necticut, the  colonists  saw  the  difficulties  in  which  their  laws 
respecting  dissenters  would  be  likely  to  involve  them.  The 
mother  country,  it  w^as  probably  thought,  would  not  willingly 
see  its  own  established  religion  proscribed  and  those  who  wor- 
shiped according  to  its  forms  subjected  to  disabilities.  (Pro- 
scription loses  all  its  beauties  when  its  authors  become  the 
subjects  of  it.)  The  General  Assembly,  doubtless,  considered 
these  things  and  determined  to  modify  its  laws,  so  far  as  they 
bore  harshly  on  the  Church  of  England.  In  1727,  in  answer 
to  a  petition  from  certain  Churchmen  in  Eairfield,  it  was  en- 

*  Rev.  Luther  Hart,  iu  Tlie  Quarterly  Cliristlan^Spectator,  Vol.  V,  p.  22T. 


HISTORY   OF   AVATERBUEY.  31 Y 

acted  that  all  taxes  levied  on  the  professors  of  the  English 
church,  in  places  where  there  was  a  minister  of  that  clmrch  in 
orders,  should  be  paid  over  to  such  minister.  These  taxes  on 
Cliurchmen  were  gatliered  by  a  special  collector  from  their  own 
denomination,  chosen  at  the  town  or  society  meetings.  When 
the  moneys  thus  raised  were  not  siifRcient  for  the  support  of 
their  own  clergymen,  they  could  levy  additional  taxes  on  their 
own  members.  In  addition  to  these  privileges.  Churchmen  were 
expressly  exempted  from  the  burden  of  building  "meeting 
houses."  These  indulgences,  however,  were  granted  more 
from  policy  and  necessity  than  preference. 

The  Episcopal  churches  or  parishes  were  merely  voluntary 
associations  They  had  no  corporate  or  legal  existence  except 
for  the  single  purpose  above  mentioned.  They  could'  not  im- 
pose rates  for  building  or  repairing  their  own  churches,  or  for 
any  purpose  but  the  maintenance  of  their  ministers.  Congrega- 
tionalism was  the  established  religion — the  religion  of  the  state. 
Congregational  societies  were  the  only  societies  known  to  law, 
and  these  were  territorial  and  exclusive. 

In  1729,  in  an  "  Act  for  the  Ease  of  such  as  Soberly  Dis- 
sent," the  Quakers  and  Baptists  having  divine  worship  of  their 
own,  and  attending  the  same,  were  excused  from  Congrega- 
tional taxation  ;  but  they  had  no  other  privileges. 

Thus  matters  continued  till  after  the  Eevolution ;  but  in 
1784,  a  law  "  for  securing  the  Eights  of  Conscience  ''  was 
passed,  which  permitted  a  man  to  join  any  denomination  of 
Christians  he  pleased,  and,  if  a  dissenter  and  an  attendant  on 
public  worship  and  a  contributor  to  tlie  support  of  the  same, 
exempted  him  from  taxes  for  the  maintenance  of  the  ministry 
and  religion  "by  law  established."  By  the  same  act,  the  dis- 
senting churches  and  congregations  had  "liberty  and  authority 
to  exercise  the  same  powers  and  privileges  for  maintaining 
their  respective  ministers  and  building  and  repairing  meeting 
houses,  as  the  ecclesiastical  societies  constituted  by  law  have 
and  do  exercise  and  enjoy."  It  was  under  this  law,  I  suppose, 
that  the  Episcopal  church  of  Northbury  was  organized  in  1784. 
Thus,  all  Christian  sects  were  put  on  a  footing  of  essential 
equalit}'. 

Our  lathers  were  rigid  in  their  notions  of  moral  and   reli- 


318  HISTORY    OF    WATEEBURY. 

gious  duty.  They  discarded  the  forms  of  the  English  church 
and  endeavored  to  seize  the  essence.  Still,  they  were  nnable 
to  get  rid  entirely  of  forms,  for  men  cannot  do  this,  however 
strenuous  their  endeavors.  Those  whicli  they  did  observe, 
they  adhered  to  Avith  singular  pertinacity.  In  so  doing,  they 
jeoparded  and  sometimes  lost  sight  of  the  substance.  They 
were  particularly  exact  in  tlie  observance  of  the  sabbatli,  and 
this  observance  was  enforced  by  pains  and  penalties.  The 
people  were  required  by  statute  to  "carefully  apply  themselves 
to  the  duties  of  religion  and  piety,  publicly  and  privately,"  on 
the  Lord's  day.  They  were  required,  on  that  day  and  also 
on  "fast  dayes  and  dayes  of  thanksgiving,"  to  go  to  meeting, 
and  they  were  not  permitted  to  go  anywhere  else,  the  fine  for 
transgressing  the  law  being,  in  each  case,  five  shillings.  "Sin- 
gle persons  being  boarders  and  sojourners,"  and  young  per- 
sons "  under  the  government  of  parents  or  masters,"  were  not 
allowed  to  "  meet  together  in  company  or  companies,"  in  the 
street  or  elsewhere,  on  tlie  evening  of  the  sabbath,  or  of  fast 
day  or  lecture  day,  the  fine  being  five  shillings.  It  was  made 
the  duty  of  constables  and  grand  jurors  "  to  walk  the  streets 
and  duly  search  all  susj^ected  places,"  and  to  bring  the  viola- 
tors of  this  law  to  justice.  These  are  the  statutes  our  fathers 
lived  under,  till  after  the  Revolution,  and  whicli  assisted  to 
mould  their  characters  and  opinions. 

In  illustration  of  what  was  considered  "  servile  labour  "  on 
the  sabbath,  no  longer  ago  than  1737,  I  would  refer  to  a  jus- 
tice trial  in  which  Isaac  Bronson,  a  leading  man  of  Water- 
bury,  was  arraigned  before  Timothy  Hopkins,  a  justice  of  the 
peace.  A  conviction  followed,  and  a  fine  of  five  shillings  with 
the  costs  of  court  was  imposed.  The  criminal  party,  not  being 
satisfied  with  the  decision,  petitioned  (incftectually)the  General 
Court  for  relief,  and  at  the  same  time  exj^lained  the  nature  and 
extent  of  his  "  crime,"  as  follows  : 

To  the  Hojioural)le  gcncrall  Court  [kc]  siting  att  Newhavcn  second  Thurs- 
day of  October  ITS? — the  memorial  of  Isaac  Brounson  of  waterbury  humbly  show- 
eth  that  one  m"'  justice  Timothy  Hopkins  of  sd  waterbury,  [&c.]  by  his  speisall 
writ  caused  your  memorialist  to  apear  before  him  on  the  24""  day  of  august  Last 
to  answer  for  being  gilty  of  doing  servil  Labour  on  the  sabbath  or  Lords  day,  in 
the  site  of  said  justice,  and  gaue  judgment  against  your  memorialest  in  the  follow- 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUEY.  319 

ing  words  viz  [Here  follows  a  copy  of  the  execution  and  sentence  of  the  court, 
from  which  it  appears  that  the  crime  was  committed  on  the  7th  day  of  August, 
and  that  the  culprit  was  sentenced  to  pay  5s.  fine,  and  5s.  6d.  costs,  "  and  stand 
committed  till  he  comply,"  &c.]  so  that  your  memoriallest  was  forced  to  pay  the 
money  or  go  to  prison,  which  money  was  paid  down  to  the  justice  and  your 
memorialest  stands  Recorded  gilty  of  the  breach  of  the  sabbath  but  thinks  him- 
self wholy  innocent  of  any  such  crime :  and  can  not  help  himself  so  without 
Remedy  except  this  Honourable  assembly  giue  Releafe,  and  he  is  under  great  dis- 
advantage to  Lay  the  whole  matter  before  your  Honours,  m""  justice  utterly  Refus- 
ing to  giue  him  a  copy  of  the  writ  by  which  he  was  brought  before  him  :  therefore 
is  obliged  to  Declare  the  fiicts,  by  sd  justice  judged  to  be  creminall,  which  was  his 
sister  had  lived  sometime  att  his  Hous  about  four  miles  out  of  Town  but  by  reason  of 
seuere  ilness  went  Home  to  her  mother  and  stayed  with  her,  but  she  amended,  and 
on  the  sabbath  day  night  after  meeting  was  ended  asked  your  memorialist  if  he  would 
Let  her  Ride  behind  him  home  to  his  house  which  he  did:  this  is  the  whole  that 
he  is  charged  with  and  it  was  no  harme  as  he  thought;  how  cucr  he  stands 
Recorded  as  aboue  and  hath  been  already  put  of  from  Recieuing  the  sacrament  on 
that  account,  and  there  upon  prays  this  Honourable  assembly  to  make  void  the  sd 
judgment  if  they  in  their  wisdom  can  think  it  just,  or  grant  him  Liberty  of  a  hear- 
ing of  the  whole  matter  before  the  County  Court  to  be  holdeu  att  Ncwhavcn  in 
ovember  next,  and  order  the  sd  justice  to  furnish  him  with  a  copy  of  his  pro- 
ceedings in  the  case  in  order  to  his  hauiug  afair  Tryall  at  the  sd  Court,  or  any  other 
way  grant  Relcaf  [&c.] 

Isaac  Brounson. 

If  any  man  convicted  of  "  prophaning  tlie  saLLatli "  refused 
to  pay  his  fine,  lie  might  be  publicly  whipped.  This  was  the 
law  in  1784  and  afterwards. 

By  an  old  statute,  (in  existence  after  the  Revohitlon,)  each 
householder  was  required  to  have  at  least  one  Bible.  Nu- 
merous families  were  to  have  "  a  considerable  number  of 
bibles,"  besides  suitable  orthodox  catechisms  and  other  books 
of  practical  godliness.  It  was  the  duty  of  the  selectmen  to 
"  make  diligent  inquiry  "  after  these  things,  and  constables, 
jurymen  and  ty thing  men  were  to  make  diligent  search  after 
and  presentment  make  of  all  breaches,  &c. 

The  legislation  of  our  ancestors  was  harsh,  sometimes  vin- 
dictive. It  attempted  too  much.  Its  ends  were  often  unjusti- 
fiable, frequently  trivial.  It  interfered  unwarrantably  with 
personal  rights.  It  took  it  for  granted  that  a  desirable  object, 
in  every  case,  was  to  be  secured  by  some  special  law.  That  an 
evil  existed  was  a  sufiicient  reason  why  a  statute  should  be 
enacted.  The  truth  was  not  recognized,  and  is  not  yet  fully 
understood,  that  there  are  many  irreguralities  in  the  moral 


320  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBURT. 

world  (sin,  in  the  language  of  theology)  which  legislation  can- 
not reach,  Man,  it  was  conceived,  was  utterly  depraved  by 
nature,  always  inclining  to  go  astray.  He  was  treated  as 
though  conscience,  trutli,  justice,  honor,  were  no  part  of  his 
moral  constitution.  His  whole  conduct  and  his  entire  busi- 
ness, to  their  minutest  details,  must  be  regulated  by  laws. 
These  laws  assumed  a  perfect  uniformity  of  religious  views,  of 
moral  principles  and  of  opinions  generally.  A  strict  con- 
formity was  expected  from  all.  Those  who  entertained  pecu- 
liar sentiments,  particularly  on  religious  subjects — who  pre- 
sumed to  differ  from  the  ruling  classes — had  a  hard  time  of  it. 
They  felt  that  by  coming  to  America  they  had  not  escaped 
tyranny  in  aggravated  forms. 

As  an  illustration  of  the  trivial,  not  to  say  ridiculous,  legisla- 
tion of  our  fathers,  I  may  refer  to  the  anti-tobacco  laws.  The 
use  of  tobacco  was  regarded  (correctly)  as  demoralizing,  par- 
ticularly to  the  young.  Therefore,  the  General  Court  order- 
ed that  no  person  under  20  years  of  age  should  use  it.  ISTo 
other  person  (not  accustomed  to  it!)  could  employ  it  without 
a  certificate  from  a  physician  and  a  license  from  the  Court. 
He  who  was  addicted  to  its  use  was  forbidden  to  indulge  his 
appetite  in  company,  or  publicly  in  the  streets,  or  when  at 
labor  or  on  a  journey,  unless  ten  miles  from  home,  and  then 
not  but  once  a  day.  The  penalty  for  each  offense  was  six  pence, 
to  be  paid  without  gainsaying  ! 

It  is  well  known  that  slavery  was  formerly  an  "  institution  " 
of  Connecticut.  Our  ancestors,  whom  we  are  accustomed  to 
revere  for  their  virtues  and  religion,  were  "  trafficers  in  human 
flesh  !"  Southmayd,  Leavenworth,  Trumbull,  Scovill,  Dea. 
Clark  and  Dea.  Garnsey,  those  holy  men  and  others  like  them, 
held  their  fellows  in  bondage!  For  their  guilt  in  this  regard, 
their  decendants  do  not  apply  to  them  the  same  epithets,  pre- 
cisely, that  they  sometimes  bestow  on  cotemporary  sinners  of 
the  same  class.  Does  this  lenity  of  judgment  come  from  the 
conscious  obligation  of  the  "higher  law" — Honor  thy  father 
and  thy  mother  ? 

)    The  first  settlers  of  Waterbury  had  not  many  slaves.     It  is 

/not  certain  they  had  any  ;  though  it  is  probable  some  three  or 

four  (perhaps  more)  were  slave  owners,  possibly  from  the  first. 


Xy^/f-^'-i^n^^c^LL^^ 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  321 

The  truth  is,  the  great  proj)ortion  of  them  were  too  poor  to 
own  that  kind  of  property.  Luxuries  of  all  kinds  were  be- 
yond their  reach.  They  lived  in  the  plainest  manner  and  did 
their  own  work.  Owing  to  a  lack  of  tools,  machinery,  roads 
and  productive  lands  prepared  for  tillage,  or  in  other  words, 
capital,  the  surplus  products  of  labor  were  small.  Compara- 
tively, a  man  could  do  but  little  more  than  maintain  himself. 
Hence  the  necessity  that  all  should  work,  young  and  old,  male 
and  female.  If  the  addition  of  a  negro  to  a  family  increased 
production,  it  also  increased  consumption  ;  and  if  a  support  in 
infancy  and  old  age  is  taken  into  the  account,  almost  in  an 
equal  ratio.  Hence  the  inducement  with  the  early  planters  of 
Waterbury,  to  own  slaves  could  not  have  been  great,  even 
could  they  have  found  the  means  to  purchase  them.  The  prof- 
its of  slavery  in  Connecticut  were  never  large,  and  the  sacri- 
fice, when  it  was  finally  got  rid  of,  was  not  serious. 

The  first  slave  in  Waterbury,  of  which  I  have  certain  knowl- 
edge, was  Mingo,  who  was  the  property  of  Dea.  Thomas 
Clark,  about  1730.  He  was  then  a  boy.  His  master  used  to 
let  him  for  hire  by  the  day,  first  to  drive  plow,  then  to  work 
with  the  team.  At  Dea.  Clark's  death  in  1764,  Mingo  was 
allowed  to  choose  which  of  the  sons  he  would  live  with.  He 
preferred  to  remain  at  the  old  homestead  with  Thomas ;  but 
after  the  latter  commenced  keeping  tavern,  he  did  not  like  his 
occupation  and  went  to  reside  with  Timothy  on  Town  Plot.  He 
had  a  family,  owned  considerable  property,  and  died  in  1800. 

Parson  Southmayd  owned  two  slaves  at  the  time  of  his 
death,  Sampson  and  Phillis.  Parson  Leavenworth  owned 
two,  Peg  and  Phillis ;  Parson  Trumbull  of  Westbury,  two  or 
more ;  Parson  Scovill,  two,  Phillis  and  Dick.  Dick  died  so 
late  as  1835,  aged  90.  He  used  to  tell  the  story  of  his  cap- 
ture on  the  shores  of  Africa  when  a  boy,  as  he  was  playing 
in  the  sand.  He  was  sold  several  times,  always  with  the  un- 
derstanding that  he  might  return  when  he  chose.  He  was  at 
one  time  the  property  of  Dea.  Stephen  Bronson.  After  his 
old  master  removed  to  New  Brunswick,  he  usually  worked 
for  Dea.  Bronson  or  Mr.  James  Scovill,  and  was  always  re- 
garded as  a  member  of  the  family.  He  was  a  faithful  negro. 
The  writer  remembers  with  affection  his  kind  oflices,  in  child. 
21 


322  niSTOEY  OF  watekbuet. 

hood.  Poor  man!  He  became  blind  in  his  old  age,  and  tlie 
wicked  boys  sometimes  played  tricks  with  him.  He  had  a 
wife  and  children  and  some  property.  Peace  to  his  memory  ! 
— Capt  William  Hickox  died  in  Westbnry,  in  1T37,  possessed  of 
two  slaves,  Lewis  and  Phillis.  Capt.  George  JSTichols  had  one ; 
Lieut.  Tho.  Eichards  one,  Jack ;  Dea.  Jonathan  Garnsey  one 
or  more ;  Esq.  Joseph  Hopkins,  one.  Silence ;  Dr.  Preserved 
Porter,  two,  Fortune  and  Dinah,  &c.  I.  Woodruff,  of  Westbury, 
owned  an  "  Lidian  woman,"  who  died  in  1774.  Indian  slaves 
appear  to  have  been  common  in  the  earlier  periods  of  the 
Colony. 

By  an  old  colonial  law,  men  were  sometimes  sold  into 
slavery  for  crime.  Samuel  Lanson  was  arraigned  before  the 
Court  of  Assistants  in  Hartford,  May  10,  1670,  and  convicted 
of  notorious  stealing  and  "  breaking  uj)  and  robbing  of  Weth- 
ersfield  and  Branford  mill  several  times,"  and  living  in  a 
"renegade  manner  in  the  wilderness."  He  was  fined  £20 
and  ordered  to  be  sent  to  the  Barbadoes  and  sold  as  a  servant 
for  four  years.  Under  a  similar  law,  Joseph  Lewis  of  Water- 
bury,  a  town  pauper,  was  tried  before  Thomas  Clark,  Esq.,  May 
12, 1756,  on  complaint  of  Oliver  Terrell,  for  stealing  forty  shil- 
lings "  proclamation  money,"  and  condemned  to  pay  "  six 
pounds  proclamation  money  [three  times  the  amount  stolen] 
with  costs  of  suit,  and  also  a  fine  of  ten  shillings,  lawful  mon- 
ey, to  the  town  treasurer,  and  be  whipped  on  ye  naked  body 
ten  stripes — costs  taxed  at  £1-3-3." — He  was  whipped  accord- 
ing to  the  judgment  of  the  court,  and  bound  out  to  the  plain- 
tiff, as  a  servant,  till  the  above  said  sum  should  be  paid. 

By  an  early  statute  of  the  Colony,  "  all  single  persons  [they 
were  not  favorites  of  our  Puritan  ancestors,  and  were  watched 
with  great  jealousy]  who  lived  an  idle  and  riotous  life,"  might 
be  bound  out  to  service.  By  a  law  passed  in  1725,  and  which 
was  in  existence  till  after  the  Eevolution,  any  "  delinquent," 
in  the  sense  of  this  statute,  might  be  disposed  of,  or  bound 
out  to  service,  or  in  other  words  sold,  by  order  of  any  court, 
assistant  or  justice  of  the  peace,  for  so  long  a  time  as  was 
necessary  to  pay  the  costs  of  prosecution. 

In  the  volume  of  statutes  which  was  published  immediately 
after  the  Eevolutionary  war,  there  was  an  act  which  declared 


I 


HISTORY   OF   WATEKBUEY,  323 

tliat  no  negro  or  mnlatto  child,  born  in  this  State  after  March 
1,  1784,  should  be  held  in  servitude  any  longer  than  till 
he  or  she  should  arrive  at  the  age  of  twenty-five  years.  In 
the  same  act,  there  were  restraints  put  npon  slaves  similar  to 
those  we  find  at  the  South  at  the  present  day.  Any  Negro, 
Mulatto  or  Indian  servant  found  wandering  beyond  the  bounds 
of  the  town  to  which  he  belonged,  without  a  ticket  or  pass 
from  a  justice  of  the  peace  or  the  owner,  might  be  seized  by 
anybody  as  a  run-a-way.  If  a  slave  was  caught  out  at  night, 
after  nine  o'clock  in  the  evening,  without  an  order  from  his 
master,  any  person  might  apprehend  and  bring  him  (or  her) 
before  a  justice,  who  might  sentence  him  (or  her)  to  be  pub- 
licly whipped  on  the  naked  body.  Without  such  order,  the 
ferryman  who  passed  a  slave  over  his  ferry,  or  the  tradesman 
who  bargained  with  him,  was  liable  to  a  fine.  So  was  the 
taverner  who  "  entertained  "  him,  or  permitted  him  to  be  in 
his  house,  after  nine  o'clock  at  night.  Free  negroes  traveling 
without  a  pass  might  be  arrested. 

In  l8-i8,  the  Legislature  enacted,  for  the  first  time,  that  no 
person  should  be  held  in  slavery  in  this  State. 

Individually,  our  Puritan  ancestors  were  very  much  such 
men  as  we  are — little  better,  no  worse.  There  were  among 
them  men  eminent  for  virtue,  knowledge  and  patriotism ;  while 
there  was  about  the  ordinary  proportion,  found  in  the  farming 
communities,  of  the  worthless  and  the  vile.  A  very  slight 
inspection  of  the  records  of  the  criminal  courts,  will  dissipate 
the  dreams  of  those  who  contend  that  our  great  grandsires 
were  perfect  beings.  They  were  bred  in  a  rigorous  age,  and 
were  exposed  to  peculiar  hardships,  dangers  and  temptations. 
These  gave  origin  to  peculiar  moral  characteristics — to  virtues 
and  to  vices  w^hich  were  a  little  difterent  from  those  of  other 
ages  and  communities.  But,  on  the  whole,  they,  like  us,  were 
average  men.  We  have  more  science,  a  more  widely  diftused 
literature ;  better  roads  and  bulkier  ships  ;  but  our  men  are 
like  their  men — shoots  from  the  same  stock.  Undistinguish- 
ing  eulogy  cannot  properly  be  applied  to  any  of  the  genera- 
tions of  Kew  England  ;  nor  will  truth  justify  indiscriminate 
censure.  Saints  and  sinners,  wise  men  and  foolish,  have  been 
(and  will  continue  to  be)  found,  in  fair  proportion,  among  all. 


324  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

"We  do  rightly  in  judging  leniently  of  tlie  weaknesses,  and 
mistakes  and  even  the  guilt  of  our  fatliers.  We  make  allow- 
ance for  their  circumstances,  tlie  state  of  their  civilization,  the 
age  in  which  they  lived,  the  modes  of  thinking  which  prevail- 
ed at  the  time,  their  education,  even  their  temptations  and 
prejudices,  and  the  entire  group  of  influences  which  contrib- 
uted to  mould  opinions.  Were  men  equally  tolerant  and 
charitable  towards  their  contemporaries,  much  of  the  wrangling 
which  at  times  makes  earth  a  pandemonium  w^ould  be  avoided. 
Were  men  to  think  more  of  their  own  infirmities  and  guilt 
and  less  of  their  neighbors,  they  would  illustrate  a  practical, 
instead  of  a  speculative  and  professed  Christianity. 

After  the  close  of  the  war  with  the  eastern  Indians  in  1725, 
New  England  was  at  peace  at  home  and  abroad  till  the  break- 
ing out  of  the  Spanish  war  (in  which  France  soon  joined)  in 
1739.  In  the  expedition  against  Cape  Breton  in  1745,  which 
resulted  in  the  capture  of  Louisburg,  in  which  Connecticut  had 
engaged  nearly  one  thousand  men,  Waterbury  appears  to  have 
been  represented,  but  I  know  not  how  numerously.  Capt. 
Samuel  Hickox  was  chosen  by  the  Assembly  a  captain  of  one 
of  the  companies  for  this  service.  Whether  he  joined  the  ex- 
pedition does  not  appear.  Samuel  Thomas,  one  of  the  early 
settlers  of  Westbury,  died  at  Cape  Breton,  Jan.  29,  1745-6, 
probably  in  garrison. 

Soon  after  the  close  of  the  Spanish  and  French  w^ar,  or  in 
1749,  Waterbury  was  visited  by  a  malignant  and  fatal  disease. 
It  took  the  form  of  a  low,  nervous  fever,  and  is  said  to  have 
run  its  course  in  nine  days.  If  the  sick  person  survived  the 
ninth  day,  recovery  was  expected.  It  spread  into  all  parts  of 
the  town  and  was  very  fatal  in  Woodbury,  as  mentioned  by 
Mr.  Cothren.  It  commenced  in  June  and  continued  till  the 
following  January.  The  most  fatal  months  were  August  and 
September.  In  these  two  months,  there  were  thirty-eight 
deaths,  besides  two,  at  least,  not  recorded.  In  the  whole 
course  of  the  epidemic,  there  were  sixty-four  deaths  that  are 
recorded,  about  twenty  of  them  heads  of  families.  In  addi- 
tion to  these,  Mr.  Kichardson,  in  his  "  Historical  Sketch  of 
Watertown,"  gives  the  names  of  ten  persons,  making  seventy- 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUEY.  325 

four  in  all  that  are  known.  It  is  said  there  were  thirty  deaths 
in  Nortlibury,  some  of  them  doubtless  not  recorded.  In  such 
times  of  terror,  all  business  is  carelessly  done.  There  were 
probably  not  fewer  than  ninety  deaths,  in  the  whole,  which, 
out  of  a  population  of  1500,  would  be  in  the  proportion  of  one 
in  sixteen  and  two  thirds,  or  six  per  cent.,  a  greater  propor- 
tional mortality  than  has  since  occurred  in  the  same  length  of 
time.  In  many  instances,  entire  families  were  prostrated  by 
the  disease.  In  two  of  the  three  parishes,  scarcely  ten  houses 
escaped.  In  several  families,  three  died  in  each ;  and  in  one, 
that  of  John  Barnes,  four,  all  under  nineteen  years  of  age. 
Once  in  this  sickness,  there  were  six  graves  open  in  the  old 
burying  ground,  at  the  same  time.  Often  there  was  difficulty 
in  procuring  medicine,  and  sometimes  the  people  had  to  go  as 
far  as  Norwich  for  it.  On  one  occasion,  Mr.  Leavenworth,  the 
minister,  performed  the  journey* — in  those  days,  no  small 
undertaking.  From  the  middle  of  harvesting  time  till  the 
last  of  September,  nearly  all  the  inhabitants  that  were  in  health 
were  constantly  employed  in  watching  the  sick  and  burying 
the  dead.  The  crops  were  neglected,  and  despair  settled  upon 
the  countenance  of  all.  The  grass  upon  the  meadows  dried  as 
it  stood,  A  part  of  it  only  was  mowed,  and  that  which  was 
gathered,  on  account  of  its  having  been  secured  out  of  season, 
was  nearly  worthless.  Not  more  than  half  the  usual  acres  of 
the  winter  grains  were  sown,  and  these  were  so  imperfectly  till- 
ed, and  the  seed  was  put  into  the  ground  so  late,  that  a  famine 
was  apprehended.  Under  these  circumstances  of  discourage- 
ment, a  memorial,  signed  by  the  inhabitants  and  dated  Oct.  10th, 
1749,  was  forwarded  to  the  Assembly.  They  spoke  of  having 
"  been  visited  by  remarkable  and  sore  sickness,"  and  then  re- 
counted their  griefs  and  misfortunes.  They  prayed  for  the  abate- 
ment of  their  "  country  tax  "  for  the  year,  on  the  list  of  1748, 
Their  request  was  granted,  but  they  were  not  permitted  to 
draw  their  school  money  for  the  then  current  year. 

Li  1755,  the  "  French  Neutrals,"  or  Acadians,  (the  old 
inhabitants  of  Nova  Scotia,)  because  they  refused  to  take  up 
arms  against  France  and  in  favor  of  their  new  masters,  the 

*  Bennet  Bronson's  MSS. 


326 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBUKT. 


English,  were  driven  from  their  homes  and  country,  to 
the  number  of  seven  thousand,  and  distributed  among  the 
American  colonies,  from  ISTew  Hampshire  to  Georgia.  Four 
hundred  were  sent  into  Connecticut,  and  apportioned  among 
the  different  towns  according  to  their  respective  lists.  Six 
were  received  by  Waterbury  and  nine  by  Woodbury. 

In  1756,  a  formal  declaration  of  war  was  made  by  England 
against  France,  but  hostilities  had  been  carried  on  between 
the  two  nations  for  some  time  previous.  This  was  an  eventful 
war  for  the  American  Colonies,  and  Waterbury  was  well  rej)- 
resented  in  it.  Capt.  Eldad  Lewis  with  his  company  from 
Waterbury  marched  to  the  scene  of  danger  in  the  "•  Fort  Wil- 
liam Henry  alarm,"  in  1757.     His  comp»any  consisted  of 


Lieut.  John  Sutliff, 
Ens.  Gideon  Hotchlviss, 
Serg.  Stephen  Welton, 
Daniel  Porter,  (clerk,) 
Thomas  Richards, 
Stephen  Matthews, 
Samuel  Lewis, 
Solomon  Barrit, 
EHakim  "Welton, 
Hezekiah  Brown, 
Shadrack  Benham, 
Daniel  Barnes, 


Joseph  Warner, 
Charles  Warner, 
Oliver  Terrell, 
Jesse  Alcock, 
Abraham  Richards 
Samuel  Judd, 
Joel  Frost, 
Thomas  Cole, 
Thomas  Williams, 
W.  Scott, 
William  Judd, 


Jonathan  Garnsey, 
Simeon  Beebe, 
Thomas  Hickox, 
Samuel  Richards, 
Nathaniel  Edwards, 
Nathaniel  Foot, 
Reuben  Blakeslee, 
Asher  Blakeslee, 
Ambrose  Field, 
Benjamin  Cook, 
Benjamin  Barnes. 


Capt.  Lewis  aj^pears,  afterwards,  to  have  been  at  Lake 
George.  Lieut.  Gideon  Hotchkiss  and  Enos  Ford  and,  proba- 
ably,  his  entire  company,  were  with  him.  Some  of  the  other 
ofiicers  and  soldiers  who  were  engaged  in  the  old  French  war 
were,  Lieut.  Gershom  Fulford,  Lieut.  Timothy  Clark,  Lieut. 
Joel  Clark,  Ensign  Daniel  Potter,  Lieut.  Samuel  Judd,  Lieut. 
Oliver  Welton,  Rev.  Mark  Leavenworth,  chaplain,  Israel  Cal- 
kins, James  Brown,  James  Baldwin,  Jesse  Baldwin,  Phineas 
Castle,  Daniel  Webb,  Samuel  Fenn,  Abner  Munson,  Thomas 
Porter,  Stephen  Bronson.  Daniel  Porter,  Jr., was  surgeon's  mate. 

When,  in  August,  1757,  Fort  William  Henry,  situated  at 
the  head  of  Lake  George,  and  commanded  by  Col.  Monroe, 
was  besieged  by  a  French  and  Indian  force  under  Montcalm, 
the  English  general,  Webb,  was  lying  with  an  army  of  four 
thousand  men  at  Fort  Edward,  fourteen  miles  distant.     In- 


HISTORY   OF   WATEEBrET.  327 

stead  of  marching  to  tlie  relief  of  Col.  Monroe  and  thus  saving 
the  fort,  Webb  wrote  him  a  letter  advising  his  capitnlation- 
The  messenger  and  letter  were  intercepted  bj  the  Indian  al- 
lies of  Montcalm.  The  latter,  thinking  Webb's  communica- 
tion would  promote  his  own  interests,  forwarded  it,  at  once,  to 
the  commander  of  the  fort.     A  capitulation  soon  followed. 

]^ow  the  messenger  who  bore  the  letter  of  Gen.  Webb  seems 
to  have  been  Israel  Calkins  of  Waterbury,  (above  named.) 
He  remained  in  the  hands  of  the  Indians  after  the  fort  was  sur- 
rendered, and  was  by  them  taken  to  Canada.  Here  he  was 
"  redeemed  by  a  French  gentleman,"  sent  to  France  a  prisoner 
of  war,  and  finally  in  a  cartel-ship  to  England  to  be  exchang- 
ed. He  landed  in  Boston  Oct,  6,  1758,  and  immediately  peti- 
tioned the  Legislature  for  "an  allowance  of  wages  during  his 
captivity,"  and  also  a  gratuity  in  consideration  of  the  "  severe 
calamaties  "  he  had  suffered,  "  more  than  words  can  express 
or  imagination  paint."  He  speaks  of  his  property  having  been 
dissipated  during  his  absence,  and  of  the  extreme  destitution 
of  himself  and  family.  He  "  implores  the  pity  and  compassion 
of  the  Honorable  Assembly,"  &c.  His  prayer  was  heard  and 
£30  granted  him.— (State  Papers,  War,  Vol.  Til.)  He  re- 
sided in  that  i^art  of  the  town  which  is  now  called  Naugatuck, 
and  was  living  in  1782. 

The  seven  years  war  ended  in  17G3  and  "gloriously"  for  the 
British  Empire  in  America.  The  conquest  of  Canada  and  its 
cession  to  England  secured  the  New  England  colonies  from  fur- 
ther hostile  incursions  from  the  North.  But  with  peace 
came  the  troubles  with  the  mother  country.  The  British  min 
istry  undertook  to  carry  out  their  plan  of  subduing  the  colo- 
nies— of  making  them  more  dependent  on  the  crown  and  Par- 
liament. It  was  deemed  necessary  that  the  royal  government 
should  be  carried  on  without  the  assistance,  and  in  spite  of 
the  resistance,  of  turbulent  colonial  assemblies.  It  was  claim- 
ed that  the  king  and  Parliament  in  political  and  civil  matters, 
and  the  bishops  in  ecclesiastical  affairs,  were  supreme  in  all 
cases  whatsoever.  There  could,  properly,  be  no  state  without 
a  king,  or  church  without  a  bishop.  What  were  considered  to 
be  inherent  rights  and  chartered  privileges  were  not  to  stand 
in  the  way  of  the  proj)Osed  changes.     To  carry  out  the  plans 


32S  ZZ~T'."ZT   <KF  'WAIEEBaCIKr. 

«jC  Ae  MiiiiisErT,  : "  ~"  -  ;  i  led  that.  a.  sttanidiinig;  aimiT  sliio»iiild  be 
imiiaiiffiillaiiTmed  inn  :^  tS  at  their  own  expense.    A  system 

€»f  taaafiMML  "wras  ir"  -  '  :lie  cekibrated  staamp  act  pa^ed 

iffl  IT^I^    In  fmsmag  y   '  i^st  nmeaint  tx>  affinni  and  estab- 

liii  a  ri^Bt.    Am.  in. :  T.e-  lias  a  eecoaadaij  ©bjecL 

The.  cffiteiiisti'  mesffitei  '  ^  '~  :^  sceouanit  of  the  princi- 

ple it  inTCMved-    TSlt  '  -  .to  enslaTe  them  5  or 

at  leaBttj,  to  onrtail  ft-. .  . :l-ied  liie  exeHn^ve 

privillege  of  lerynng.  _  — ninig  their  own 

taxesi.   Tlney insisted  l ,:  '■-'■  r    _--_-:.;.:  -c-.i^iaticm  shonldgo 

togetSner,  and  that  as  tJney  luad  no  Toice  in  Parliament,  the  lats- 
ter  conM  not,  li^tfinilly,  impoee  on  them  taxes.  The  revo- 
iMiosiiainr  stoon  iras-  alieady  g;atlaering;'  and  mon'e  minds  were 
Bliinped  with  pirolooBnd  emoltioiDi.  TSictee  who  "believed  in  the 
Talidifrjr  of  Presbjteiiam  ordination  and  the  independence  of 
the  American  cAmiDrdbiee — wi&o  abliL«»ied  pielaer  almost  as 
mneh  as  tiner  did  tlae  pcjpe — were  qnick  to  see  the  religious 
beariiDgs  of  the.  qneetions  <sf  tine  daj.  Tbej  Mt  tbat.  such  a 
n&e^sniie  as  tine  stamp  act  m.nst  be  rested,  in  the  be^nning^ 
as  a  dangeroiDs  encioaehment  on  thm*  jnst  li^ifs,  and  which, 
if  not.  opposed  snceessfiiiOIl j  woniild  end  in  due  lo^  <xf  their  most 
cherished  institiigtions,  political  and  religions.  The  Omrcb-of- 
£ng^land-n&en  beld  differemt  iriews  andbad  difierent.  sympalbies. 
Tbej  looked  upon  tbeiis  as  the  onlj  tme  chmch,  and  Congre- 
gationaE^m  as  a  beresj  wMch  bad  ruled  too  long  in  Idiis  coun- 
tzy.  Thej  £&.Tored  the  liews  and  boped  for  the  triumpb  01 
the  British  goTemmeut*  The  Bev.  Jobn  Beach,  in  Oct  1765, 
wrote  to  bis  £riends  in  ^Eiugland,  sa jing  tbat  be  could  not  '^  dis- 
oorer  in  any  of  the  church  people  the  least  inclination  to  sedi- 
tion and  rebellion  agssinst  tbeir  mol^iker  oonntzy,  on  account  of 
the  stamp  dmtj.''  The  Bev.  Mr.  SooviE  of  Waterburj,  in  a 
letter  dated  O^cL  €,  17€T,  wrote  as  follows : 

the  dumtdi  peofiie  in  imj  cme  sppsxr  W  Itsre  z  senone  semee  of  rd&i^xni,  ami  z. 
heastjr  lowe  and  aBettSam  to  «Miir  excdikmit  etmsA,  -mMcii  nakes  tibem  gicaflT 

hmmt  Idiue  ^e^hsaMe  camSS&m  vS  line  daimrcib  im  tbeoe  jMurits,  &r  vamt  <xf  rmdent 
'  fflnianm^  gmwsim.  amtS  esssfoim  t^soee  of  oor  ovm  eonmiaiiiuMi.*    Thcj 


HISTORY   OF  -WATERBrEY.  329 

who  live  in  England  where  the  church  is  rather  triumphant,  can  hare  but  a  faint 
idea  of  its  truly  militant  state  here  in  Xew  England,  where  the  dissenters  take  oc- 
casion to  Insult  and  revile  us,  even  for  want  of  that  discipline  which  thev  so  un- 
justly and  clamorously  oppose.  Though  they  would  be  thought  the  greatest 
friends  of  liberty,  yet,  I  doubt  not,  they  would  think  it  a  great  degree  of  oppres- 
sion, and  even  persecution,  to  be  obliged  themselves  to  go  3,000  miles  for  what 
they  judged  essential  to  the  perfection  of  their  church  ;  and  I  trust  in  God,  we 
are  as  conscientious  in  the  profession  of  the  truth,  and  adherence  to  the  most 
pure  and  primitive  church  in  the  world,  as  they  can  be  in  their  errors.  They 
have  plentifully  reproached  us  with  the  hated  name  of  Jacobites,  persons  disaflFected 
to  the  present  royal  family,  of  blessed  memory ;  but  when  the  Stamp  Act  brought 
our  loyalty  to  the  test,  I  thank  God  the  scale  turned  greatly  in  our  favour.  While 
we  sensibly  feel  all  these  great  disadvantages,  it  fills  us  with  real  grief  and  con- 
cern to  find  the  venerable  society  decUning  to  open  any  more  missions  in  Xew 
England.  They,  under  God,  by  their  generous  bounty  and  pious  liberality,  have 
been  the  nursing  fathers  and  chief  supporters  of  the  languishing  church  in  this 
land,  for  which  unspeakable  favour  our  warmest  sentiments  of  gratitude  and  duty 
will  always  attend  them  ;  and  we  most  humbly  and  earnestly  bog  the  continuance 
of  their  patronage  and  kind  assistance,  so  long  as  our  cii-cumstauces  continue  upon 
all  accounts  so  truly  pitiable.* 


CHAPTER    XXI. 


K  E  V  0  L  U  T  I  0  y  A  R  Y    HISTORY. 

The  patriots  of  Waterbury  took  au  early  and  decided  stand 
against  tlie  designs  of  the  mother  country.  Their  own  liistory 
had  not  tended  to  soften  their  prejucUces  against  the  English 
church.  The  two  parties  were  more  evenly  balanced  than  in 
most  other  towns.  The  Churchmen  were  in  a  minority,  but 
they  Avere  still  numerous ;  sufficiently  so  to  excite  the  jealousy 
and  even  the  fears  of  the  majority,  TVlien,  at  one  time,  they 
obtained  the  ascendency  in  society  meeting,  in  Korthbury, 
the  manner  they  conducted  themselves  had  not  inspired  confi- 

♦  Hawkins'  Missions,  p.  S9S, 


330  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

dence  in  tlieir  moderation.  Religions  denominations  in  pow- 
er are  not  wont  to  treat  the  opposition  with  peculiar  leniency. 
Such  is  the  transcendent  importance  of  religions  truth,  and 
such  the  wickedness  of  unbelief  or  a  contrary  belief,  that  men 
are  apt  to  think  any  means  justifiable  which  tend  to  spread 
the  one  or  suppress  the  other.  The  Congregationalists  cannot 
plead  guiltless  of  the  charge  of  attempting,  when  in  authority, 
to  "  crush  out "  "  dissent"  by  the  exercise  of  power. 

"When  at  last  the  war  of  the  Revolution  broke  out,  in  1Y75, 
the  Churchmen  of  Waterbury,  of  Connecticut  and  of  ]S"ew 
England  were  seen  ranged  upon  the  side  of  the  parent  coun- 
try and  against  the  rebel  colonists.  They  were  Royalists  or 
Tories.  They  had  reasons,  satisfactory  to  themselves,  for 
their  opinions  and  conduct.  They  wished  the  success  of  the 
British  government,  because  on  that  success  depended  their 
hopes  of  worldly  distinction  and  religious  privilege.  On  that, 
they  supposed,  they  must  rely  for  the  jDermanent  ascendency 
of  the  Ej)iscopal  church  in  America — its  doctrines,  its  faitli 
and  its  worship.  To  England  they  were  bound  by  the  strong- 
est ties.  From  that  country  their  parish  clergymen  had  from 
the  first  received  a  great  part  of  their  suj)i3ort.  They  owed  it 
a  debt  of  gratitude,  which,  if  they  could  not  repay,  they  were 
unwilling  to  forget.  They  had  always  been  the  weaker  party, 
had  been  ridiculed  in  their  weakness  and  sometimes  been 
"  voted"  out  of  their  just  rights.  Their  feelings  had  not  been 
conciliated  and  they  had  come  to  hate  the  Whigs  most  hearti- 
ly. Tliey  now  hoped  their  wrongs  would  be  redressed.  They 
thought,  with  some  show  of  reason,  that  resistance  would  be 
in  vain  and  that  the  rebels  would  soon  be  compelled  to  re- 
turn to  duty.  It  is  impossible,  thought  they,  for  the  American 
Revolutionists,  without  money  or  discipline,  ill  furnished  with 
arms  and  not  perfectly  united  among  themselves,  to  resist  for 
a  long  time  the  whole  force  of  the  British  empire.  And  there 
were  others — wise  men — that  entertained  the  same  views. 
The  eventual  triumph  of  the  American  cause,  at  least  as  to  time 
and  manner,  must  be  attributed  mainly  to  the  blunders  of  the 
British  ministry.  Had  the  event  turned  out  diflierently,  the 
course  of  the  colonists  would  have  been  considered  rash.  The 
truth  is,  though  each  party  was  determined  on  its  course, 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBUET.  331 

neitlier  expected,  for  a  long  time,  to  come  to  blows.  So  im- 
perfectly did  they  uiiderstaud  each  other. 

So  great  was  the  alienation  of  feeling  between  the  rival  re- 
ligious sects  in  Waterbmy,  that  parents  could  not  always 
agree  to  send  their  children  to  the  same  school.  To  carry  out 
this  feeling,  two  districts  were  sometimes  made  within  the 
same  territorial  limits.  In  1775,  a  vote  was  passed  dividing 
the  school  ^district  on  the  Farmington  and  Wallingford  road 
into  two,  one  for  the  "  Presbyterians "  and  one  for  "  the 
Church  of  England."  At  one  period,  when  thick  gloom  had 
settled  over  the  prospects  of  the  colonists  and  the  English  or 
church  party  felt  almost  sure  of  a  speedy  triumph,  some  of 
the  more  enthusiastic  of  the  latter  met  together  and  determin- 
ed in  what  manner  the  farms  of  their  opponents  should  be 
divided  among  themselves,  after  the  subjugation  of  the 
country.* 

In  Westbury,  as  well  as  in  the  old  society,  excitement  ran 
high.  The  windows  of  the  Episcopal  church  were  demolished. 
The  principal  members  were  not  allowed  to  attend  public 
worship,  but  were  confined  to  their  farms.  "  A  Presbyterian 
deacon"  said,  publicly,  "that  if  the  colonies  carried  their 
point,  there  would  not  be  a  church  [English]  in  the  Is^ew  En- 
gland states."t  In  JSTorthbury,  the  Churchmen  were  numer- 
ous, every  one  of  whom  was  a  Tory,  while  all  the  Congrega- 
tionalists  were  "Whigs.  Capt.  Amos  Bronson,  an  Episcopa- 
lian, commanded  a  militia  company  there,  the  members  of 
which  were  about  equally  divided  between  the  two  parties. 
His  commission  was  taken  from  him ;  but,  being  a  moderate 
Tory,  he  was  reelected.  A  commission  was  of  course  refused 
him.:}: 

Several  influential  Churchmen,  early  in  the  progress  of  the 
war,  renounced  the  royal  party  and  joined  the  Whigs. 
Among  these  were  Capt.  John  Welton  of  the  old  society  and 
Capt.  Amos  Bronson  of  Korthbury.  A  certain  pamphlet 
written  by  Dr.  Franklin  contributed  materially  to  this  result ; 
while  the  superciliousness  of  the  British  officials,  and  the  bar- 


*  MSS.  of  Bennet : 

t  MSS.  of  the  Rev.  Chauncey  Prindle,  published  in  the  Chronicle  of  the  Church,  July  26,  1S30. 

$  A  manuscript  letter  from  his  son,  Mr.  Noah  M.  Bronson,  Medina,  Ohio. 


332  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUEY. 

barous  mode  in  wliicli  their  government  carried  on  the  war, 
were  not  without  influence. 

The  Episcopal  clergy  of  Connecticut  and  of  New  England 
took  the  lead  in  opposition  to  the  war.  They  kept  up  a  cor- 
respondence with  the  society  at  home,  (of  which  they  w^ere 
beneficiaries,)  in  which  they  expressed  their  views  freely  of 
the  merits  of  the  controversy,  and  gave  information  of  the 
state  of  the  country.  The  loyalty  of  their  own  church  is  a 
subject  for  frequent  comment  and  congratulation.  Dr.  Ei chard 
Mansfield  of  Derby  wrote,  in  Dec.  17T5,  that  he  had  preach- 
ed and  taught  quiet  subjection  to  the  king  and  parent  state, 
and  that  he  w^as  well  assured  that  the  clergy  in  general  of  the 
church  of  the  Colony  of  Connecticut  had  done  the  same.  Of 
the  one  hundred  and  thirty  families  under  his  charge,  one 
hundred  and  ten,  he  continued,  "  are  firm  and  steadfast  friends 
to  government  and  detest  and  abhor  the  present  and  unnatu- 
ral rebellion,  and  all  those  measures  which  led  to  it."  Far- 
ther on,  he  remarked,  "the  worthy  Mr.  Scovill  [of  Waterbury] 
and  the  venerable  Mr.  Beach  [of  Newtown]  have  had  still 
better  success,  scarcely  a  single  person  being  found  of  their 
congregations  but  what  hath  persevered  steadfastly  in  his 
duty  and  loyalty."* 

The  Rev.  Mr.  Inglis,  in  Oct.  1776,  wrote  to  the  society  in 
England  as  follows  : 

I  have  the  pleasure  to  assure  you  that  all  the  society's  missionaries,  without  ex- 
cepting one,  in  New  Jersey,  New  York,  Connecticut,  and,  so  far  as  I  can  learn,  in  the 
other  New  England  colonies,  have  proved  themselves  faithful,  loyal  servants  in 
these  trying  times ;  and  have  to  the  utmost  of  their  power  opposed  the  spirit  of  dis- 
affection and  rebellion  which  has  involved  this  continent  in  the  greatest  calamities. 
I  must  add,  that  all  the  other  clergy  of  our  church  in  the  above  colonies,  though 
not  in  the  society's  service,  have  observed  the  same  Une  of  conduct. — [Hawkins' 
Missions.] 

[At  the  North,  the  laymen  of  the  Episcopal  faith  were  commonly,  like  their  rec- 
tors. Loyalists ;  but  at  the  South  it  was  different,  and  many  of  the  most  distin 
guished  Whigs  of  that  section  were  zealous  friends  of  the  established  church. — 
Sabine's  Loyalists,  p.  51. 

Tory  physicians  were  more  common  than  Tory  barristers,  or  even  clergymen, 
and  were  treated  with  more  indulgence  than  other  Tories. — Ibid,  p.  58.] 

In  consequence  of  the  course  taken  by  the  Episcopal  cler- 

*  Hawkins'  Missions. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  333 

gj,  their  open  opposition  to  the  war  and  their  secret  correspond- 
ence with  the  enemy,  they  were  watched  with  jealousy  and 
sometimes  treated  with  the  greatest  severity.  They  would  not 
pray  for  the  continental  Congress  after  independence  was  de- 
clared, but  insisted  on  using  the  liturgy  as  it  was,  and  praying 
for  the  king  and  royal  family.  At  this,  the  "Whigs  were 
wroth  and  would  allow  no  services  in  the  English  churches. 
Mr.  Inglis  wrote  in  Oct.  1776,  that  "to  officiate  publicly  and 
not  pray  for  the  king  and  royal  family,  according  to  the  litur- 
gy, was  against  their  duty  and  oath  ;  and  yet  to  use  the  pray- 
ers for  the  king  and  royal  family  would  have  drawn  inevita- 
ble destruction  on  them.  The  only  course  which  they  could 
pursue,  to  avoid  both  evils,  was  to  suspend  the  public  exer- 
cises. This  was  accordingly  done."  Mr.  Beach  of  Connecti- 
cut, alone,  the  writer  goes  on  to  state,  continued  to  officiate 
after  independence  was  declared,  he  affirming  "  that  he  would 
do  his  duty,  preach  and  pray  for  the  king,  till  the  rebels  cut 
out  his  tongue  !"  Mr.  Inglis  farther  complained  that  the  cler- 
gy were  everywhere  threatened  and  reviled  and  imprisoned 
on  slight  pretenses — "  some  were  pulled  out  of  the  reading 
desk  because  they  prayed  for  the  king,  and  that  before  inde- 
pendence was  declared" — "others  have  been  warned  to  ap- 
pear at  militia  musters  witli  their  arms,  have  been  fined  for 
not  appearing  and  then  threatened  with  imprisonment  for  not 
paying  their  fines."* 

Dr.  Mansfield,  already  mentioned,  wrote  to  Gov.  Tryon  ear- 
ly in  the  war,  giving  it  as  his  opinion  that  if  the  king's  troops 
were  present  to  protect  the  Eoyalists,  "  several  thousand  men 
in  the  three  western  counties  of  the  Colony  [of  Connecticut] 
would  join  him."  Tlie  letter  was  intercepted  and  Dr.  M.  was 
forced  to  fly  for  his  life. 

In  1777,  according  to  Mr.  Inglis,  all  the  society's  missiona- 
aries  in  Connecticut  were  "  either  removed  to  a  distant  part 
of  the  province  from  their  cures  and  there  detained,  or  else 
confined  in  their  own  houses."  To  the  credit  of  the  parties  in 
Waterbury,  it  may  be  said  that,  though  the  excitement  was 
intense,  no  scenes  were  enacted  here  such  as  were  witnessed 
in  some  other  towns.    This  is  doubtless  to  be  attributed  in  part 


334  HISTOET   OF   WATEEBURT. 

to  tlie  prudence  and  wisdom  of  Mr.  Scovill,  He  was  some- 
times tlireatened.  Occasionally,  lie  had  reason  to  fear  injury. 
In  the  more  critical  seasons,  it  is  stated,  he  often  slept  from 
home  in  order  to  be  out  of  the  way  of  midnight  calls ;  but  he 
had  the  courage,  which  the  "Whigs  respected,  to  remain 
through  the  war. 

It  has  been  customary  to  denounce  the  Tories  of  the  Eevo- 
lution  as  the  worst  of  people — devils  incarnate.  But  the  time 
has  arrived  when  we  should  be  able  to  view  them  impartial- 
ly. They  were  mistaken  men,  but  no  doubt  can  exist  that 
they  were  in  the  main  conscientious  and  patriotic.  They 
thought,  doubtless,  that  they  were  in  pursuit  of  the  greatest 
and  most  permanent  good  of  their  country.  They  were  actua- 
ted by  a  principle  of  loyalty  to  government  and  of  respect  for 
existing  laws. 

When  the  time  for  action  came,  the  majority  of  the  peo- 
ple of  Waterbury  were  the  fast  friends  of  colonial  rights.  Af- 
ter the  meeting  of  the  General  Congress,  in  1774,  a  town 
meeting  was  warned  to  be  held  on  the  17th  day  of  ISTovember, 
1774,  "  for  the  purpose  mentioned  in  the  eleventh  article  of 
the  association  of  the  General  Congress,  &c."  At  this  meet- 
ing, Phineas  Royce,  Esq.,  was  chosen  moderator,  and  Rev. 
Mr.  Leavenworth  made  a  prayer.* 

*  Periodically  and  on  important  special  occasions,  our  fathers  met  in  town  meetings  for  the 
transaction  of  the  public  business  and  for  general  consultation  and  discussion.  These  meetings 
give  a  good  idea  of  American  republicanism  in  its  practical  workings.  In  them,  the  people 
learned  their  first  lessons  in  government.  These  assemblies  formerly  exercised  more  extensive 
powers,  and  had  the  oversight  of  more  numerous  interests,  than  now.  The  affairs  of  ecclesias- 
tical and  school  societies,  as  well  as  those  belonging  more  strictly  to  the  whole  town,  were  reg- 
ulated in  them.  Voluntary  associations  are  of  comparatively  modern  origin.  Tlie  great  town 
meeting,  so  called  by  Mr.  Southmayd,  was  held  annually  in  December.  A  person  to  be  qualified 
to  vote  must  be  "  an  admitted  inhabitant,  a  householder  and  a  man  of  sober  conversation,"  and 
have  a  freehold  estate  of  fifty  shillings.  After  some  influential  man  had  been  chosen  modera- 
tor, "  the  meeting  was  opened  with  prayer."  (The  custom  of  opening  town  meeting  with  prayer 
is  said  to  be  still  kept  up  in  some  of  the  old  towns  in  this  State.  When  companies  met  for  mili- 
tary parade,  a  prayer  from  the  minister  formerly  introduced  the  business  of  the  day.) 

A  town  clerk,  constable  and  selectmen,  "able,  discreet  and  of  good  conversation,"  and  other 
officers,  were  then  chosen,  in  proper  order.  The  penalty  for  refusing  to  serve  was  forty  shil- 
lings. All,  down  to  fence-viewers  and  town-brander,  were  required  to  take  an  oath,  and  this  was 
generally  administered  in  open  meeting.  To  prevent  disorderly  conduct  in  town  meetings,  a 
statute  was  passed  to  punish  the  same.  "  At  a  court  for  ye  tryal  of  small  causes,  held  in  Water- 
bury,  Jan.  9, 1756,  present  Thomas  Clark  one  of  his  Magesties  Justices  of  the  peace,"  Thomas 
Doolittle  and  John  Barnes  were  arraigned  for  the  breach  of  the  above  law,  and  were  fined,  each 
5s.  and  the  costs  of  court,  Is.  At  the  next  town  meeting,  Feb.  16,  1756,  there  is  this  entry — 
"Voted  to  give  Thomas  Doolittle  his  fine  for  speaking  without  liberty  in  town  meeting.'' 
Barnes,  it  is  presumed,  showed  less  contrition,  and  the  fine  was  exacted. 


HISTOET   OF   WATEEBUEY.  335 

At  the  same  meeting,  the  extracts  of  the  proceedings  of  the  late  respectable 
continental  Congress  holden  at  Philadelphia  having  been  read,  (together  with  the 
resolves  of  the  House  of  Representatives  [of  Connecticut]  thereon,)  and  the  same 
appearing  a  wise  and  judicious  plan  in  the  present  dangerous  and  difficult  state  of 
our  public  affiiirs,  in  order  to  effect  'a  happy  and  much  to  be  desired  union 
between  Great  Britain  and  these  colonies — 

This  meeting  therefore  agree  and  resolve  flvithfully  to  adhere  to  and  strictly  to 
abide  by  the  association  entered  into  by  said  Congress — and  appoint  the  gentle- 
men hereafter  named  a  committee  to  see  the  same  carried  into  execution  in  every 
article  thereof. 

The  above  unanimously  voted  and  for  a  committee,  Joseph  Hopkins  and  Timo- 
thy Judd,  Esqs.,  captains  John  Welton,  Gideon  Hotchkiss,  John  Lewis,  Benjamin 
Richards,  Nathaniel  Barnes,  Doct.  Ebenezer  Beardsley,  Doct.  Roger  Conant,  Messrs. 
Andrew  Bronson,  James  Bronson,  Stephen  Matthews,  Jesse  Curtis,  Josiah  Rogers, 
chosen. 

At  the  same  meeting,  voted  that  the  town  clerk  shall  get  a  copy  of  the  doings 
of  the  Congress  well  bound  at  the  cost  of  the  town,  and  lodge  it  in  his  office,  there 
to  remain  among  the  records  of  the  town,  for  the  use  of  future  generations. 

Voted  also,  that  in  case  a  County  congress  should  be  agreed  upon  and  desired 
in  the  County,  (which  we  would  recommend,)  then  the  above  said  committee  shall 
choose  and  appoint  two  out  of  their  number  to  attend  such  Congress. 

Voted  also  that  the  doings  of  this  meeting  shall  be  published. 

The  articles  of  the  Continental  Congress  to  which  the  town 
"  resolved  faithfully  to  adhere,"  pledged  the  delegates  and  the 
people  of  the  several  colonies  they  represented  to  a  system  of 
non-intercourse  with  Great  Britain,  this  being  thought  the 
most  effective  means  of  obtaining  redress  of  grievances.  Noth- 
ing was  to  be  imported,  bought,  sold  or  consumed  which  was 
the  product  of  the  British  Islands — no  East  India  tea,  no  mo- 
lasses, syrup,  coffee,  pimento,  &c.  Slaves  were  no  longer  to 
be  imported,  and  the  trade  was  to  be  discontinued.  The 
eleventh  article  recommended  that  every  county,  city  and 
town  should  appoint  a  kind  of  vigilance  committee,  "  whose 
business  it  shall  be  attentively  to  observe  the  conduct  of  all 
persons  touching  this  association,"  and  if  any  one  was  found 
violating  it,  "  the  case  to  be  published  in  the  Gazette,  to  the 
end  that  all  such  foes  to  the  rights  of  British  America  may  be 
publicly  known  and  universally  contemned,  as  the  enemies  of 
American  liberty,  and  thenceforth  we  respectively  break  off 
all  dealings  with  him  or  her."  It  was  in  accordance  with  the 
recommendation  of  this  article,  (and  of  the  House  of  Kep- 
resentatives  of  the  Colony,)  that  the  town  meeting  above 
noticed  was  warned  and  the  committee  named  appointed. 


336  HISTOET   OF   WATERBURY. 

At  the  next  meeting,  which  was  held  Jan.  12th,  following, 
the  town  voted  that  the  selectmen  should  procure  a  double 
stock  of  powder,  lead  and  flints,  and  "build  a  house  suitable 
to  store  "  them  in — a  proof  that  the  people  were  thoroughly 
in  earnest.  While  they  talked  of  "  a  happy  and  much  to  be 
desired  union  between  Great  Britain  and  these  colonies,"  and 
felt  doubtless  as  they  talked,  they  were  determined,  as  far 
as  possible,  to  be  prepared  for  the  worst.  At  the  same  meet- 
ing. Col.  Jonathan  Baldwin,  Capt.  John  Welton,  Joseph  Hop- 
kins, Esq.,  Capt.  Samuel  Hickox,  Timothy  Judd,  Esq.,  Messrs. 
Stephen  Welton,  James  Porter,  Jr.,  Stephen  Seymour,  Randal 
Evans,  David  Smith,  Josiah  Rogers,  Samuel  Lewis,  Esq., 
and  John  Hopkins  were  chosen  a  committee  "  to  receive  the 
donations  that  may  be  contributed  towards  the  relief  of  the 
poor  in  Boston,"  who  were  sufiering  at  this  time,  from  the 
effects  of  the  odious  Boston  Port  Bill.  The  Boston  people 
threw  the  tea  on  which  a  duty  had  been  levied  by  the  gov- 
ernment at  home,  into  the  harbor,  and  this  bill  was  passed 
by  Parliament  in  retaliation.  The  design  was  to  destroy  the 
commerce  of  that  refractory  town,  and  to  transfer  its  business 
to  Salem.  It  was  an  oppressive  act,  a  general  sympathy  was 
awakened,  and  material  aid  was  contributed,  in  all  parts  of  the 
country,  for  the  relief  of  that  doomed  people.  Nearly  all  the 
towns  in  Connecticut  had  public  meetings  and  sent  money, 
provisions,  live  stock,  or  whatever  they  could  spare. 

After  the  skirmishes  (not  hattles)  at  Lexington  and  Concord, 
in  April,  1775,  the  Connecticut  Legislature  took  immediate  and 
decisive  steps  in  way  of  preparing  for  the  contest.  An  act 
was  passed  for  enlisting  and  equipping  one  fourth  part  of  the 
militia,  "  for  the  safety  and  defense  of  the  colony."  They 
were  to  be  divided  into  six  regiments,  and  the  companies  to 
contain  one  hundred  men  each.  The  eighth  company  of  the 
first  regiment  (commanded  by  Major  General  David  Wooster) 
was  to  be  raised  in  Waterbury,  The  officers  appointed  to 
command  it  were  Phineas  Porter,  captain ;  Stephen  Mat- 
thews, 1st  lieutenant ;  Isaac  Bronson,  2d  lieutenant;  David 
Smith,  ensign.  Their  term  of  service  was  not  to  exceed  seven 
months.  Each  soldier  was  to  have  a  j^i'emium  of  fifty-two 
shillings  to  be  paid  at  the  time  of  enlistment,  and  one  month's 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY.  337 

advance  pay,  amounting  to  forty  shillings,  besides  ten  shillings 
for  the  use  of  his  arms,  and  sixpence  a  day  for  billeting  money. 
Capt.  Porter  Avas  in  readiness  and  "  about  to  march  "  late  in 
May. 

As  an  attack  was  apprehended  on  some  of  the  towns  upon 
the  sea-coast,  Capt.  Porter  was  first  ordered  to  march  into 
Fairfield  county.  Afterwards,  he  w^as  directed  to  go  to  the 
Hudson  Kiver  and  so  north.  He  w^as  in  Greenbush  in  Octo- 
ber. Thence  he  marched  by  way  of  Albany  to  Lake  Cham- 
plain,  where  he  was  at  the  expiration  of  the  time  for  which 
his  company  was  enlisted.  Some  of  them  then  returned  to 
Waterl)ury.  Others  chose  to  continue  with  the  army,  went 
into  Canada  and  were  with  generals  Montgomery  and  AVoos- 
ter  at  the  taking  of  Montreal.  Some  were  present  at  the 
storming  of  Quebec,  imder  Arnold,  late  in  Dec.  1775,  wdien 
Montgomery  fell.  Among  them  w^ere  Freeman  and  Daniel 
Judd.     The  latter  died  of  small  pox,  near  Quebec,  Feb.  2, 1776. 

In  the  year  1775,  Waterbury  furnished,  for  the  continental 
army,  one  hundred  and  fifty-two  soldiers.  This  appears  from 
a  certificate  of  the  town  oflicers  to  the  treasurer  of  the  Colou}^, 
claiming  an  abatement  of  this  number  of  polls  (taxed  at 
£2,736)  according  to  an  act  of  Assembly.  Of  the  fifty-five 
towns  whose  returns  are  on  record,  Waterbury  appears  to  have 
provided  more  men  than  any  other,  except  Farmington  and 
New  Haven,  which  had  respectively,  one  hundred  and  fifty- 
seven  and  one  hundred  and  fifty-three.  Woodbury  had  one 
hundred  and  fifty.  No  town  in  the  Colony,  not  itself  the 
theater  of  conflict,  made  greater  personal  sacrifices  through- 
out the  war  than  Waterbury.  It  contributed  inen — the  rank 
and  file  of  the  army — and  had  but  an  insignificant  share  of  the 
honors  and  emoluments  of  the  war. 

In  March,  1776,  Gen.  Howe  evacuated  Boston,  and  in  June 
following  appeai-ed  before  New  York.  Congress  made  a  re- 
quisition on  Connecticut  for  troops.  The  Legislature,  then  in 
session,  (in  June,)  passed  an  act  for  raising,  by  voluntary  in- 
listment,  seven  regiments  to  be  marched  immediately  to  New 
York  to  join  the  continental  army.*     They  were  to  serve  till 

*  Such  was  the  enthusiasm  for  the  public  service,  at  an  early  period,  that  in  many  towns 
voluntary  companies  were  raised,  officered  and  equipped.     July  4,  1776,  a  company  of  house- 

90, 


338  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBUKY. 

tlie  25th  of  December  following,  unless  sooner  d  is  charged. 
The  officers  of  the  fifth  regiment  Avere  William  Donglass,  (of 
I*«[orthford,)  colonel,  James  Arnold,  lieutenant  colonel,  and 
Phineas  Porter,  major.  The  sixth  company  of  this  regiment 
was  from  Waterbnrj,  and  its  commissioned  officers  were  John 
Lewis,  Jr.,  captain,  James  "Warner,  1st  lieutenant,  Michael 
Bronson,  2cl  lieutenant  and  Josej^h  Beach,  Jr.,  ensign.  Early 
in  Augnst,  such  was  the  critical  condition  of  affairs,  at  the 
urgent  solicitation  of  General  Washington,  the  governor  and 
council  of  safety,  constitnting  the  committee  of  war,  directed 
all  the  standing  militia  west  of  the  Connecticut  Piver  and  two 
regiments  on  the  east  side,  to  march  forthwith  to  Kew  York, 
"  until  the  present  exigency  is  over."  The  Waterbury  militia, 
attached  to  the  10th  regiment,  marched  under  Lieut.  Col. 
Jonathan  Baldwin,  the  17th  of  August,  ten  days  only  after 
the  order  was  issued.  It  is  estimated  that  full  one  half  of 
Washington's  army  in  and  about  ]^ew  York,  this  year,  were 
Connecticut  men  ;  and  that  during  this  season,  (17Y6,)  the 
Colony  had  in  all  full  twenty  thousand  troops  in  the  service, 
whereas,  her  whole  available  military  force,  (from  sixteen  to 
fifty  years  of  age,)  did  not  much  exceed  twenty-three  thousand. 
It  is  notorious  that  Connecticut  did  more  than  her  part  through- 
out the  Eevolutionary  war,  as  she  had  uniformly  done  in 
previous  wars.  This  fact,  however,  is  most  likely  to  be  con- 
ceded when  stated  with  modesty.  If  other  States  did  not  do ' 
as  much,  they  all  did  well.  Xo  one  of  them  which  does  not 
institute  invidious  comparisons  need  be  ashamed. 

In  the  disastrous  conflict  on  Long  Island,  Avhich  occurred 
on  the  2'rth  day  of  August,  1776,  "  Colonel  Douglass  with  his 
regiment  [the  fifth]  was  in  the  thickest  of  the  fight."*  He 
was  afterwards  engaged  in  several  actions  near  J^ew  York, 
and  M-as  himself  particularly  distinguished  at  Harlem  Heights, 
White  Plains  and  Phillip's  Manor.  In  the  retreat  from  Long 
Island  the  night  after  the  fight.  Major  Porter  is  said  to  have 

holders  was  formed  in  Wnterbury.    They  furnished  themselves  with  arms  and  accoutrements  ; 
chose  Jonathan  Curtis  for  their  captain,  Timothy  Pond  for  lieutenant  and  Samuel  Scovill,  en- 
sign, and  reported  themselves  ready  for  duty.    Hinman's  War  of  the  Revolution,  p.  559. 
*  Hollister's  Connecticut,  Vol.  11,  p.  2T6. 


HISTORY    OF    WATEEBTTRY,  339 

been  in  the  last  boat.  Afterwards,  lie  was  taken  a  prisoner 
in  Xew  York,  and  at  tlie  end  of  tliree  months,  was  exchanged. 
Capt.  Stephen  Matthews,  attached  to  Col.  Heman  Swift's  regi- 
ment, had  eleven  of  his  company  killed  in  this  campaign. 
Lient.  Nathaniel  Edwards  (of  Westbnrj)  was  taken  prisoner 
at  the  capture  of  Fort  Washington.  He  was  not  released  for 
two  years,  and  did  not  return  to  his  home  till  1780. 

In  ^November,  the  General  Assembly  enacted  that  four 
battalions,  (regiments,)  properly  officered,  should  be  forthwith 
raised  by  voluntary  enlistment,  (to  take  the  place,  probably, 
of  those  whose  term  of  service  was  about  to  expire,)  who  were 
to  serve  till  the  15th  day  of  March,  17T7.  The  officers  of  one 
of  the  companies  (which  was  from  Waterbury)  in  the  2d  bat- 
talion, commanded  by  Col.  Thadeus  Cook,  were  Benjamin 
Richards,  captain,  Isaac  Bronson,  Jr.,  1st  lieutenant,  William 
Law,  2d  lieutenant,  Benjamin  Fenn,  Jr.,  ensign. 

At  the  time  the  British  troops  were  making  their  way  across 
New  Jersey  towards  Philadelphia,  Pennsylvania  and  the 
wliole  country  became  very  much  alarmed.  While  extraordi- 
nary efforts  were  being  made  to  reinforce  Gen.  Washington 
and  Gen.  Lee,  the  General  Assembly  of  Connecticut,  in  Decem- 
ber, earnestly  called  upon  all  able  bodied  men,  living  west  of 
Connecticut  river,  to  go  forward  and  offer  themselves  for  the 
service.  A  committee  was  appointed  "  to  arouse  and  animate 
the  people  to  rise  and  exert  themselves  with  the  greatest  ex- 
pedition," and  "to  set  on  foot  with  all  expedition  an  enlistment 
in  the  various  parts  of  the  State."  On  this  committee  are 
found  the  names  of  Mark  Leavenworth  and  Capt.  Thomas 
Porter,  apparently  of  Waterburj-. 

Near  the  close  of  this  year,  (1776,)  the  General  Assembly 
reorganized  the  militia  of  the  State,  forming  them  into  six  bri- 
gades. At  the  same  time,  "  it  was  enacted  that  all  male  per- 
sons from  16  years  of  age  to  60  years,  not  included  in  the  train- 
band, and  exempted  from  ordinary  training,"  (with  certain  ex- 
ceptions,) should  be  formed  into  companies,  and  equipped  to 
constitute  an  alarm  list.  These  were  called  "alarm  companies." 
Those  over  fifty  years  of  age  could  not  be  compelled  to  march 
out  of  the  State.  With  this  exception,  they  were,  "  in  case  of 
alarm,  or  orders  given  by  a  superior  officer,"  to  be  liable  to 


340  HISTORY   OF  WATERBUKT. 

the  same  duties,  service  and  penalties  as  others  of  the  niiKtia.* 
I  iind  in  Major  Phineas  Porter's  "  orderly  book"  a  list  of  the 
officers  of  the  alarm  companies  of  Waterbury,  (to  wit,)  1.  Capt. 
Phineas  Castle,  Lieut.  Ashbel  Porter,  Ens.  Timothy  Clark. 
2.  Capt.  John  Woodruff,  Lieut.  Thomas  Dutton,  Ens.  John  ' 
Stoddard.  3.  Capt.  Isaac  Bronson,  Lieut.  Aaron  Benedict, 
Ens.  John  Slater.  4.  Capt.  Jothani  Curtis,  Lieut.  Timothy 
Pond,  Ens.  Samuel  Scovill.  5.  Capt.  Stephen  Seymour,  Lieut. 
Daniel  Sanford,  Ens.  Samuel  Parker.  6.  Capt.  Josiah  Terrel, 
Lieut.  Stephen  Hopkins,  Ens.  Hezekiali  Hine. 

The  experience  gained  in  the  campaigns  in  1775  and  1776 
had  taught  the  country  the  ruinous  effects  of  the  system  of 
short  enlistments.  'No  sooner  had  the  troops  acquired  some 
discipline  and  efficiency,  than  their  term  of  service  had  expired, 
and  their  places  must  be  filled  by  raw  recruits.  Patriotic  senti- 
ments and  enthusiasm,  it  was  found,  were  not  a  safe  de- 
pendence in  a  protracted  war.  They  might  lead  to  heroic 
deeds,  as  at  Bunker  Hill.  They  might  sustain  soUliers  behind 
a  breast-work  ;  but  would  not  with  certainty  hold  them  to  their 
duty  in  the  open  field  and  through  a  campaign.  America 
must  have  trained  battalions  before  she  could  meet  successfully 
the  disciplined  armies  of  England.  The  Legislature,  therefore, 
in  compliance  with  a  resolution  of  Congress,  resolved  that 
eight  battalions  (regiments)  should  be  immediately  raised,  by 
enlistment,  out  of  the  Connecticut  troops  then  in  the  army  and 
other  inhabitants  of  the  State,  to  serve  during  the  war,  on  the 
terms  proposed  by  Congress.f  Among  the  officers  which  were 
at  the  same  time  appointed,  are  found  the  names  of  David  Smith, 
captain,  and  Michael  Bronson,  1st  lieutenant,  both  of  Water- 
bury.  This  was  in  November,  1776.  Capt.  Smith's  company 
was  made  up  wholly,  or  nearly  so,  of  Waterbury  men. 

Waterbury's  quota  of  troops  for  the  eight  regiments  seems 
to  have  been  one  hundred  and  thirty-one.  To  devise  measures 
to  facilitate  the  enlistment,  (which  made  but  slow  progress,) 
and  in  conformity  to  the  recommendation  of  the  governor 
and  council  of  safety,  a  town  meeting  was  called  on  the  first 

*  Hinman's  Revolutionary  War,  p.  251. 

t  Afterwards,  those  who  enlisted  for  three  years  were  put  upon  the  same  footing  as  those 
who  were  engaged  for  the  war,  except  the  former  had  no  part  of  the  100  acres  of  land. 


HISTORY    OF    WATEEBURY.  341 

clay  of  April,  1Y77.  At  this  meeting,  a  Yote  was  passed  to  give 
each  non-commissioned  officer  and  soldier  who  should  enlist, 
or  had  already  enlisted,  into  the  continental  army,  for  three 
years,  or  during  the  war,  twelve  pounds  lawful  money  annually, 
one  half  to  be  paid  at  the  time  of  enlistment.  To  provide 
the  means,  a  tax  was  laid  of  one  shilling  lawful  money  on  the 
pound,  and  a  committee  appointed  to  act  in  the  matter. 

That  the  families  of  those  who  enlisted  might  be  cared  for, 
the  governor  and  council  recommended  that  the  towns  should 
provide  for  them  the  necessaries  of  life  "  at  the  price  fixed  by 
law."  Waterbury  resolved  to  make  the  provision  and  ap- 
pointed a  committee  to  see  it  done.  Tlie  members  of  the  com- 
mittee (which  was  reappointed  annually,  in  December)  were 
Capt.  Stephen  Matthews,  Thomas  Dutton,  Jonathan  Scott, 
Benjamin  Munson,  Daniel  Bronson,  Capt.  John  "Wei ton,  John 
Thomson,  AYait  Hotchkiss,  Daniel  Sanford,  Samuel  Scovill, 
Thomas  Fancher,  Capt.  Samuel  Porter,  Gideon  Hickox,  Ste- 
phen Warner  and  Josiah  Rogers. 

In  October,  1777,  the  Assembly  ordered  that  each  town  in 
the  State  should  procure  immediately  for  each  non-commis- 
sioned oflBcer  and  soldier  in  the  continental  army  belonging  to 
such  town,  one  shirt  or  more,  one  hunting  shirt  or  frock,  one 
pair  woolen  overalls,  one  (or  two)  pair  of  stockings  and  one 
pair  of  good  shoes,  at  certain  stipulated  prices.  If  said  arti- 
cles of  clothing  could  not  otherwise  be  procured,  the  town  au- 
thorities were  authorized  "  to  impress  "  them  wherever  found, 
whenever  they  could  be  spared.  A  town  meeting  was  held 
in  October,  according  to  recommendation,  and  a  vote  taken  to 
comply,  &c.  To  carry  the  object  of  the  meeting  into  execu- 
tion, a  committee  was  appointed,  consisting  of  Messrs.  Eli 
Bronson,  David  Taylor,  Moses  Cook,  Peter  "Welton,  Abraham 
Andrews,  Samuel  Ilickox,  Phineas  Poyce,  Esq.,  John  Dunbar, 
Caleb  Barnes,  Joseph  Sutlift',  Jr.,  Daniel  Alcock,  Simeon  Hop- 
kins, Samuel  Lewis,  Esq.,  Gideon  Hotchkiss  and  Ira  Bebee. 
The  result  of  the  movement  was  that  AVaterbury  provided 
(for  which  the  selectmen  presented  an  account  against  the 
State)  115  woolen  shirts,  containing  262J  yards  of  shirting; 
21  linen  shirts  with  65  yds.  of  do.;  133  frocks,  (hunting  shirts,) 
having  366  yds.  "  toe  cloth  ;"  130  pairs  of  "  over  halls,"  having 


342  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

305f  yds.  fulled  cloth ;  18-i  pairs  of  stockings ;  127  pairs  of  slioes ; 
5  sacks  of  "toe  cloth"  for  transporting  clothing.  A  hill  was 
made  out  against  the  State  for  these  items,  to  which  was  added 
"  28s.  officers  fees  for  impressing  sundries  of  clothing."  There 
may  have  been  other  articles  furnished  besides  those  mentioned 
in  the  above  schedule,  in  order  to  make  up  the  apparent  de- 
ficiency of  some  of  them.  The  number  of  "  frocks  "  named 
(133)  may  have  been  the  whole  number  required,  and  may 
have  represented  the  number  of  soldiers  then  in  the  regular 
army  from  Waterbury. 

The  frock  or  hunting  shirt  was  a  common  article  of  the  sol- 
dier's dress  in  the  Eevolution,  It  was  recommended  by  the 
commanding  officer  of  the  Connecticut  troops  in  New  York, 
as  a  part  of  the  uniform,  as  follows  : 

The  General  being  sensible  of  the  difficulty  of  providing  cloth  of  almost  any 
kind  for  the  troopi?,  feels  an  unwillingness  to  recommend,  much  more  to  order, 
any  kind  of  uniform ;  but  as  it  is  absolutely  necessary  that  men  should  have 
clothes  and  appear  decent  and  light,  he  earnestly  encourages  the  use  of  hunting 
shirts,  with  long  breeches  of  the  same  cloth  made  gaiter  fashion  about  the  legs, 
to  all  those  who  are  unprovided.  No  dress  can  be  had  cheaper  or  more  conven. 
lent,  as  the  wearer  can  be  cool  in  warm  weather,  and  warm  in  cold  weather  by 
putting  on  under  clothes,  which  will  not  change  the  outward  dress,  winter  or 
summer — besides  which,  it  is  a  dress  supposed  to  carry  no  small  terror  to  the 
enemy,  who  think  every  such  man  a  complete  marksman.*  [Major  Phineas  Por- 
|.er's  Ordei'ly  Book,  July  2'2d,  1776.] 

Among  the  other  articles  which  the  American  army  stood 
in  need  of,  and  without  which  battles  could  not  be  won,  was 
lead.  A  committee  was  appointed  by  the  Legislature,  consist- 
ing of  Joseph  Hopkins  (of  Waterbury)  and  others,  to  search 
for  lead  mines  in  the  State.  At  the  same  time,  it  was  provi- 
ded that  the  selectmen  of  all  the  towns  should  purchase  all 
the  lead  they  could  find — lead  weights,  bar  lead,  old  lead,  shot, 
&c.,  at  a  reasonable  price,  and  to  see  that  the  same  was  cast 
into  bullets  of  suitable  and  various  sizes.  The  selectmen  of 
Waterbury  reported,  March  26, 1777,  that  they  had  "  collected 
foure   hundred  and  fifty  five   lbs.  and  were  running  up  the 

*  Our  ancestors  were  skillful  in  the  use  of  fire  arms.  Hunting  was  with  them  an  occupation. 
Deer  abounded  in  our  town,  and  were  killed  for  food  and  clothing.  There  was  a  penalty  for 
destroying  them  out  of  season,  which  was  often  exacted  of  the  Waterbury  hunters.  Foxes  and 
wild  cats  were  also  common,  and  for  the  destruction  of  these  the  town  paid  a  premium.  It  was 
in  the  pursuit  of  game  that  our  fathers  became  marksmen. 


HISTORY   OF   WATEKBURY.  343 

same  into  bullets,  and  liad  made  some  allowance  for  waste, 
the  cost  of  which  amounted  to  £1G — IT — 6,  at  9d.  per  lb." 
They  asked  for  an  order  on  the  state  treasury  for  that  amount. 

In  the  campaign  of  1777,  the  Connecticut  militia  were  not 
quite  so  severely  taxed  as  in  the  year  previous.  Late  in 
April,  however,  the  State  was  invaded  for  the  first  time,  by 
Gov.  Tyron,  when  Danbury  (where  some  military  stores  had 
been  accumulated)  w^is  burnt.  The  neighboring  militia 
were  summoned.  Many  arrived  the  next  day  to  take  part  in 
the  action,  in  which  Gen.  Wooster  was  mortally  wounded. 
Aner  Bradley  (then,  or  immediately  afterwards,  of  West- 
bury)  received  a  musket  ball  in  the  side. 

In  this  year,  Lieut.  Col.  Baldwin  was  stationed  M-ith  his  regi- 
ment at  Fishkill  and  on  the  Hudson,  as  part  of  the  force  de- 
signed to  guard  the  Highlands,  and  prevent  the  communica- 
tion of  the  enem}^  below  with  Gen.  Burgoyne,  who  was  com- 
ing down  from  the  north.  He  had  several  companies  from 
"Waterbury  with  him,  much  reduced  in  the  numbers  of  their 
men.  The  captain  and  commanding  officers  of  these,  accord- 
ing to  a  return  made,  were  Benjamin  Richards,  Aaron  Bene- 
dict, John  Woodrufi",  Phineas  Castle,  John  Lewis,  Thomas 
Fenn,  Kathaniel  Barnes,  Josiah  Terrell,  Samuel  Bronson, 
Jesse  Curtis,  Jotham  Curtis,  Joseph  Garnsey,  the  twelve 
companies  having  but  193  men.  Other  companies  swelled  the 
whole  number  of  men  to  431. 

Capt.  John  Lewis,  Jr.,  (of  Salem,)  in  pursuance  of  the  or- 
ders of  Lieut.  Col.  Baldwin,  complained  to  the  Legislature  of 
his  lieutenant,  Ira  Beebe.  "  I  mustered,"  Lewis  said,  "  and 
marched  the  company  under  my  command  to  the  Fishkills, 
where  we  arrived  on  or  about  the  8th  day  of  October  last 
past ;  and  before  I  had  opportunity  to  make  a  regimental  re- 
turn of  my  company,  said  Lieut.  Beebe  did  in  fact  come  off 
and  lead  off  a  large  number  of  my  company  without  liberty 
and  contrary  to  my  orders,"  &c.  The  document  is  dated  at 
Waterbury,  Jan.  1, 1778,  and  will  be  found  in  the  3d  Yol.  of 
Eevolutionary  papers  in  the  State  Library.  Beebe  was  or- 
dered to  pay  the  costs  that  had  arisen. 

There  was  some  difficulty  about  the  payment  of  the  10th 
regiment,  in   this  year.     Gen.  TVashington  wrote  a  letter,  da- 


344:  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

ted  April  Ttli,  1777,  to  the  governor  of  Connecticut,  declining 
to  pay,  on  acconnt  of  the  great  disproportion  of  officers  to 
soldiers,  &c.  The  Assembly  desired  the  governor  to  reply  to 
the  letter,  "  and  state  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  that  regi- 
ment and  request  payment,"  &c. 

Many  from  Waterbury  were  in  the  northern  army  under 
Gen.  Gates,  and  took  part  in  the  movements  and  the  battles 
which  terminated  so  gloriously  in  the  capture  of  Burgoyne,  in 
October,  1777.  Lieut.  Michael  Bronson,  attached  to  Col. 
Cook's  regiment,  acted  as  adjutant,  aud  particularly  distin- 
guished himself. 

In  November,  1777,  the  "Articles  of  Confederation  and 
Perpetual  Union"  were,  after  prolonged  debate,  agreed  on  by 
Congress.  These  were  to  be  proposed  to  the  several  legisla- 
tures, approved  by  them,  and  again  ratified  by  their  delegates 
in  Congress,  before  they  went  into  operation.  Before  the  Con- 
necticut Legislature  had  considered  the  subject,  the  town  of  Wa- 
terbury held  an  adjourned  meeting  "for  the  purpose  of  taking 
into  consideration  the  Articles  of  Confederation."  The  Arti- 
cles "were  read  one  by  one.  The  first,  second,  third  and 
fourth  were  approved.  "As  to  the  fifth  article,  [says  the 
record,]  it  is  the  mind  of  this  meeting  that  the  power  of  choos- 
ing delegates  to  Congress  is  invested  in  the  people — on  this 
condition  we  concur."*  The  sixth  and  seventh  articles  were 
approved.  The  eighth  article  was  "  not  satisfactory,"  on  ac- 
count of  "  the  method  of  proportioning  the  tax  for  supplying 
the  common  treasury."  "  As  to  the  ninth  article,  where  it 
mentions  the  number  of  land  forces  made  by  requisition  from 
each  state  for  its  quota  in  proportion  to  white  inhabitants  in 
such  state,  we  had  rather  choose  it  should  be  in  proportion  to 
the  number  of  free  subjects  in  each  state."  The  remaining 
articles  were  approved.  "After  going  through  the  whole  of 
said  articles,  [continues  the  record,]  the  wdiole  was  put  to  vote 
and  passed  in  the  afiirmative,  excepting  the  above  exceptions 
and  reserves." 

After  the  Declaration  or  Independence  and  its  approval  by 

*  The  fifth  article  provided  that  the  delegates  should  "be  annually  appointed  in  such  man- 
ner as  the  Legislature  of  each  State  shall  direct,"  with  a  power  reserved  to  each  State  to  recall 
its  members,  at  any  time,  and  send  others. 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBCKT.  345 

this  State,  in  Oct.  1776,  a  law  against  high  treason  was  enact- 
ed and  defined.  At  the  same  time,  an  oath  of  fidelity  to  the 
State  was  prescribed  and  enjoined,  to  be  taken  by  the  free- 
men and  oflicei's  of  the  same.  !No  person  could  execute  any 
olfice  after  Jan.  1,  1777,  till  he  had  taken  the  oath  of  fidelity; 
and  no  freeman  could  vote  for  any  officer  till  he  had  done  the 
same.  This  law  was  repealed  in  December,  but  another  was 
enacted  in  June,  1777.  At  the  session  in  August,  the  members 
of  the  Assembly  took  the  prescribed  oath.  Mr.  Joseph  Hop- 
kins and  Capt.  Ezra  Bronson  were  the  representatives  from 
"Waterbury.  On  the  16th  of  September  following,  (and  aftcr- 
vv'ards,)  the  oath  was  administered  to  the  freemen  of  Waterbury. 
The  list,  headed  by  Rev.  Mark  Leavenworth,  will  be  found  in 
the  beginning  of  the  second  volume  of  town  meetings. 

During  the  severe  winter  of  1777-8,  Washington  was  en- 
camped with  his  army  at  Yalley  Forge,  Pa,  Hunger,  naked- 
ness, disease  and  discontent  came  near  breaking  up  the  army, 
Capt.  David  Smith,  writing  from  the  "  Camp  of  Pennsylva- 
nia," under  date  of  Jan.  18, 1778,  made  a  return  of  the  names 
of  persons  under  his  command,  from  Waterbury.  They  are 
as  follows:  Sylvanus  Adams,  John  Saxton,  Ezekiel  Scott, 
Lue  Smith,  Joseph  Freedom,  Mark  Richards,  Ezekiel  Upson, 
Joel  Roberts,  Elisha  Munson,  Elisha  Hickox,  William  Bassett. 

In  1778,  the  military  companies  of  Waterbury  were  formed 
into  a  distinct  regiment  by  the  name  of  the  28th  regiment. 
The  field  officers  were  Col.  Phineas  Porter,  (of  Waterbury,) 
Lieut.  Col,  Benjamin  Richards,  (of  Westbury,)  and  Major 
Jesse  Curtis,  (of  IS'orthbury.)  Li  this  year  and  afterwards, 
Waterbury  appears  to  have  furnished  its  full  proportion  of 
troops  both  for  the  regular  army  or  "  continental  line,"  and 
for  militia  duty.  Those  who  remained  at  home  contributed, 
according  to  their  ability,  to  sustain  the  burdens  of  the  war. 
These  burdens  in  the  form  of  regular  taxes,  provisions,  cloth- 
ing, camp  equipage,  &c.,  were  heavier,  perhaps,  than  were 
ever  before  borne  by  a  numerous  people,  voluntarily.  Li  the 
early  part  of  the  war,  the  men  were  so  generally  absent  on 
military  duty  that  there  were  scarcely  any  persons  left  exce]3t 
the  aged,  the  infirm  and  the  women  to  do  the  farm  work — to  put 
in  and  secure  the  crops,  and  take  care  of  the  farm  stock. 


346  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBURY. 

Tliere  was  danger  of  famine,  not  only  in  the  army,  but  among 
tlie  people  at  large.  Tlie  disordered  condition  of  the  enrrency, 
connected  with  large  emissions  of  irredeemable  paper,  made 
(to  keep  up  its  credit)  a  legal  tender,  added  greatly  to  the 
embarrassments  of  the  country.  Labor  was  robbed  of  its  re- 
ward ;  honesty  and  fair  dealing  were  discouraged.  Individ- 
uals took  advantage  of  the  necessities  of  the  government  and 
the  general  destruction  of  credit.  To  prevent  extortion,  the 
Legislature  undertook  the  business  of  regulating  the  prices  of 
all  commodities  (including  labor)  by  statute.  Tlius  the  dif- 
ficulty was  aggravated.  Few,  at  this  time,  have  adequate  con- 
ceptions of  the  distressed  condition  of  our  country  in  those 
dark  and  perilous  days.  Those  who  talk  flippantly  of  our  in- 
stitutions ;  who  disparage  our  government ;  who  speak  lightly 
of  the  blessings  of  union  and  the  advantages  secured  by  the 
Constitution — know  little  of  their  worth — know  little  of  the 
toil  and  privation,  the  agony  and  the  blood,  which  purchased 
them ! 

Much  of  the  business  in  town  meetings,  during  the  war, 
was  to  provide  ways  and  means  for  carrying  on  the  contest. 
Committees  were  appointed  from  year  to  year,  to  furnish  cloth- 
ing for  the  soldiers  and  provide  for  their  families  at  home,  to  col- 
lect provisions  for  the  army,  to  make  tents,  &c.,  &c.  When  arti- 
cles could  not  otherwise  be  obtained,  impressment  was  resorted 
to.  Much  difficulty  was  experienced  in  complying  with  the  de- ' 
mands  of  Congress  and  the  State  for  soldiers.  After  the  first 
enthusiasm  had  subsided,  men  were  reluctant  to  enlist,  partic- 
ularly for  three  years,  or  during  the  war.  To  make  the  pay 
sure,  the  town  guaranteed  the  wages  offered  and  usually  added 
a  considerable  bonus.  Heavy  fines  were  imposed  for  delin- 
quency on  those  who  were  drafted.  Eli  Blakeslee,  Samuel 
How,  Ebenezer  Bradley,  Jr.,  and  Joseph  Bradley,  were  draft- 
ed to  go  to  'New  Haven,  but  neglected  to  appear.  They  were 
arraigned  before  the  County  Court  in  April,  1TY9,  and  fined 
each  £10,  and  costs  amounting  to  £9,  9s. 

Of  the  1,500  soldiers  which  the  Assembly  ordered,  in  May, 
1780,  to  be  raised  for  the  continental  army,  Waterbury  and 
Watertown  were  required  to  furnish  26.  At  a  town  meeting 
held  in  June,  a  committee,  consisting  of  Capt.  Phineas  Castle, 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  347 

Capt.  Samuel  Bronson,  Capt.  Isaac  Broiison,  Jr.,  Mr.  Ira  Bee- 
be,  Capt.  Josiali  Terrel,  Capt.  Samuel  Upson,  Capt.  Levi 
Gajlord,  Messrs.  Michael  Bronson,  Joseph  Beach,  Jr.,  Street 
Kichards,  Timothy  Clark  and  Jude  Hoadley,  was  appointed 
to  hire  Waterbiirj's  proportion  (thirteen)  "  to  iulist  into  the 
continental  army  in  any  company,  battalion  or  regiment,  as 
they  shall  choose,  for  the  term  of  three  years,  or  during  the 
war,  and  if  the  men  cannot  be  obtained  for  so  long  a  term, 
until  the  first  of  January  next."  At  the  same  time,  the  town 
pledged  itself  that  one  half  of  the  bounty  or  wages  should  be 
paid  in  provision  or  clothing,  at  the  prices  such  articles  com- 
monly sold  for  in  1774,  and  the  other  half  in  lawful  money, 
or  its  ecpiivalent  in  bills  of  credit,  payable  once  a  year,  once 
in  six  months,  or  once  in  three  months,  as  the  committee 
should  agree.  In  July  folloAving,  the  same  committee  was 
directed  "  to  engage  ten  other  soldiers,  which  are  now  ordered 
to  be  raised  by  the  governor  and  council  of  safety." 

In  November,  1780,  "Waterbury  and  Watertown  were  order- 
ed to  provide  14  soldiers  for  the  continental  army. 

Early  in  1781,  there  was  a  pressing  demand  for  troops  for 
Horse  Keck.  Waterbury  resolved  to  raise  its  quota,  agreea- 
ble to  the  act  of  the  Assembly  in  November  preceding.  They 
were  to  serve  one  year  from  the  ensuing  first  of  March.  Ben- 
jamin Munson,  James  Porter,  Jr.,  David  Taylor,  Daniel  Alcock, 
Jude  Iloadle}'  and  Ebenezer  Porter  were  chosen  a  committee 
to  procure  Waterbury's  quota.  At  the  same  time,  heavy  taxes 
were  laid,  and  to  facilitate  the  collection,  the  tax-payers  were 
divided  into  several  "classes"  (eighteen)  and  a  collector  ap- 
pointed for  each.  To  help  out,  the  selectmen  were  desired  to 
make  a  loan,  on  the  town's  credit,  of  a  sufficient  sum,  in  state 
money,  for  hiring  the  soldiers  for  Horse  Neck.  Some  de- 
clined to  pay  the  taxes,  Capt.  Samuel  Upson  and  others  of 
the  third  class,  in  Farmingbury,  represented  that  Abraham 
Wooster  refused  to  pay.  His  tax  was  24s.,  and  he  was  order- 
ed by  town  vote  to  be  assessed  for  double  the  amount,  accord- 
ing to  law.  David  Wooster,  David  Welton,  Henry  Grilley, 
Stephen  Scovill  and  Timothy  Scovill  also  refused,  and  were 
served  in  the  same  way. 

In  March,  1781,  the  town  voted  to  raise  ten  footmen  and 


318  HISTORY    OF    WATEEBURT. 

one  mounted  horseman  for  Horse  Neck,  according  to  act  of 
Assembly,  and  engaged  that  the  wages  oftered  by  the  State 
should  be  punctually  paid  in  silver  at  6s.  8d.  per  ounce,  or  an 
equivalent  in  bills  of  credit.  And  the  committee,  Eli  Bronson 
and  Joseph  Atkins,  Jr.,  was  authorized  to  pledge  such  addi- 
tional payment  as  might  be  necessary.  If  said  soldiers  were 
not  obtained  by  the  first  of  April,  (1781,)  the  inhabitants  were 
to  be  divided  into  classes  by  Messrs.  Aslibel  Porter,  John 
Thomson  and  Daniel  Byington,  committee,  according  to  the 
list  of  1780,  each  class  to  provide  for  one  recruit. 

In  June,  1781,  John  Welton  was  chosen  agent  to  hire  seven 
soldiers  for  the  continental  army  for  one  year,  "  on  as  reason- 
able terms  as  he  can."  A  rate  was  also  laid  of  four  pence  on 
the  pound,  payable  in  gold  or  silver,  or  good  merchantable 
beef  cattle,  at  the  prices  fixed  by  the  General  Assembly,  for 
the  purpose  of  providing  for  the  continental  army. 

In  July,  1781,  six  soldiers  for  continental  service  were  to  be 
turnished  by  Waterbury,  and  Capt.  John  Welton,  Dr."  Isaac 
Baldwin,  Charles  Upson,  David  Hotchkiss,  Isaac  Judd  and 
Eli  Bronson  were  chosen  to  divide  the  town  into  six  classes, 
each  class  to  provide  one.  Another  tax  was  at  the  same  time  laid 
of  three  pence  on  a  pound,  payable  in  lawful  silver  money,  or 
provisions,  or  clothing.  In  December,  one  soldier  was  want- 
ing to  complete  the  town's  quota  "  for  Horse  Neck  tower," 
[tour,]  and  he  was  to  be  provided  by  Stephen  Bronson  and 
others,  committee. 

Feb.  25,  1782,  the  town  passed  a  vote  to  lay  a  tax  of  three 
half  pence  on  the  pound  "  for  the  purpose  of  procuring  seven 
men  for  the  post  of  Horse  Neck  and  western  frontier,  accord- 
ing to  an  act  of  the  General  Assembly  passed  in  January 
last,"  to  be  paid  in  cattle,  sheep,  swine  or  grain,  "  according 
to  the  true  value  thereof  in  ready  money."  Joseph  Beach, 
Jr.,  was  chosen  a  committee  to  procure  them,  he  to  be  allowed 
a  reasonable  reward  for  his  services.'^  At  an  adjourned  meet- 
ing, March  11th,  measures  were  taken  to  supply  seven  men, 
"  able  bodied  and  efi^ective,"  for  the  continental  army.     Charles 

*  The  town  sometimes  contracted  with  individuals  to  furnish  the  required  soldiers.  In  1730, 
for  instance,  Seba  Bronson  and  William  Leavenworth  were  the  contractors,  as  appears  from 
some  difficulty  in  the  settlement  with  them  this  year   (1782.) 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY. 


3i9 


TJpson  and  David  Ilotclikiss  were  chosen  a  committee  to  hire 
them.  To  defray  tlie  expense,  another  tax  of  three  half  pence 
was  voted,  payable  as  before,  in  cattle,  sheep  or  swine,  or  in 
wheat  at  5s.,  rye  at  3s.  4d.,  corn  at  2s.  6d.,  oats  at  Is.  6d. 

In  the  war  of  the  Kevolution,  no  person  from  Waterbury 
attained  a  higher  rank  in  the  regular  army  than  that  of  major. 
David  Smith  of  Northbury  continued  an  officer  during  the 
war,  and  for  some  time  before  its  close  held  the  commission 
of  major.  He  was  attached,  in  the  commencement  of  1781, 
to  the  fifth  regiment  of  infantry  of  the  "  Conneciicut  line," 
commanded  by  Lieut.  Col.  Isaac  Sherman. 

I  give  below  a  list  of  such  names  as  I  have  obtained  of  those 
persons  from  Waterbury  who  were  engaged  in  the  war  of  the 
Revolution.     The  list  is  very  incomplete. 

Ethan  Andruss,  Daniel  Barnes, 

Timothy  Andruss,  Capt.  Xathaniel  Barnes, 

John  Ames,  Thaddeus  Barnes,  Jr., 

Samuel  Ames,  Capt.  Isaac  Bronson, 


Sj'lvanus  Adams, 
Luke  Adams, 
James  Adams, 
Daniel  Allen, 
Josiah  Atkins, 
Solomon  Aleock, 
Samuel  Aleock, 
John  B.  Aleock, 
Lieut.  Aaron  Benedict, 
Obed  Blakeslee, 
Enos  Blakeslee, 
John  Blakeslee, 
Amasa  Blakeslee, 
Joel  Blakeslee, 
Benjamin  Bates, 
Col.  Jonathan  Baldwin, 
Ens.  Theophilus  Baldwin, 
Abel  Baldwin, 
Benjamin  Baldwin, 
Elihu  Benham, 
Stephen  Bristor, 
William  Basset, 
Lieut.  Ira  Beebe, 
Aner  Bradley, 
John  Beach, 
Thaddeus  Beach, 
Clark  Baird, 
Benjamin  Barnes, 


Dr.  Isaac  Bronson, 
Lieut.  Michael  Bronson, 
Titus  Bronson, 
Roswell  Bronson, 
Asahel  Bronson, 
Joseph  Bronson, 
Daniel  Bronson, 
Eliel  Barker, 
Isaac  Barker, 
Giles  Brocket, 
Ehenezer  Brown, 
Thomas  Cole, 
John  Cole, 
Thomas  Chilman, 
Timothy  Cook, 
Joel  Cook, 
Sanmel  Cook, 
William  Cook, 
Selah  Cook, 
Bethel  Camp, 
Lieut.  Samuel  Camp, 
Samuel  Camp,  Jr., 
Eli  Curtis, 
Stephen  Curtis, 
Samuel  Curtis, 
Capt.  Jesse  Curtis, 
Capt.  Jotham  Curtis, 
Zadoc  Curtis, 


Israel  Calkins, 
Roswel  Calkins, 
Richard  Clark, 
Capt.  Phineas  Castle, 
Asahel  Chittenten, 
Amos  Culver, 
Cuff  Capeuny, 
Lieut.  Thomas  Dutton, 
Lieut.  Titus  Dutton, 
Stephen  Davis, 
Jonathan  Davis, 
Miles  Dunbar, 
Amos  Dunbar, 
Joel  Dunbar, 
Isaac  Dayton, 
Samuel  Dayton, 
Nathaniel  Edwards, 
Elisha  Frost, 
Aaron  Fenn, 
Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Ens.  Benjamin  Fenn, 
Cephas  Ford, 
Joseph  Freedom, 
John  Falleudon, 
Lieut.  John  Fultbrd, 
James  Fulford, 
Israel  Frisbie, 
David  Foot, 
Moses  Foot, 
Bronson  Foot, 
Benjamin  Gaylord, 
Jonathan  Gaylord, 


350 


UISTOKY   OF   WATERBURT. 


Southmayd  Garnsey, 
Jonathan  Garnsey, 
Capt.  Joseph  Garnsey, 
Paul  Griggs, 
Simeon  Graves, 
James  Grannis, 
Gideon  Hiclvox, 
Elisha  Hickox, 
William  Hickox,  Jr., 
Capt.  James  Hickox, 
Abraham  Hotchkiss, 
Truman  Hotchkiss, 
Ebenezer  Hotchkiss, 
Jesse  Hotchkiss, 
Capt.  Gideon  Hotchkiss, 
Timothy  Humaston, 
Jared  Humaston, 
Lemuel  Hopkins, 
Hollingsworth  Hine, 
Benjamin  Hine, 
Hezekiah  Hine, 
Reuben  Hine, 
Nathaniel  Hall, 
James  Hull, 

Culpepper  Hoadley, 
Philo  Hoadley, 
Ebenezer  Hoadley, 
William  Hoadley, 

Jude  Hoadley, 

Lazarus  Ives, 

Elnathan  Ives, 

Dennis  Judd, 

Samuel  Judd, 

Daniel  Judd, 

Freeman  Judd, 

Chandler  Judd, 

Stephen  Judd, 

Brewster  Judd, 

Samuel  Kimball, 

Capt.  John  Lewis,  Jr., 

Serg.  Samuel  Lewis, 

Joseph  Lewis, 

David  Lewis, 

Joel  Lines, 

Richard  Lawrence, 

Charles  Merriman, 

Thomas  Merchant, 


Elisha  Munson, 

Natlianiel  Morris, 

Levi  Marks, 

Philip  Martin, 

Samuel  Mix, 

Titus  Mix, 

Capt.  Stephen  Matthews, 

Jonah  Mallory, 

Joseph  Mun, 

Timou  Miles, 

Joseph  Minor, 

Abijah  Osborn, 

Joshua  Osborn, 

Isaac  Osborn, 

Maj.  Phineas  Porter, 

Truman  Porter, 

Lieut.  Pendleton, 

Daniel  Pendleton, 

Jared  Prichard, 

George  Prichard, 

George  Prichard,  Jr., 

Amasa  Preston, 

Jonathan  Pardee, 

Luke  Potter, 

Munson  Pond, 

Ward  Peck, 

Augustus  Peck, 

Eliel  Parker, 

Elijah  Parker, 

Aaron  Parker, 

Capt.  Benjamin  Richards 

Mark  Richards, 

Joel  Roberts, 

Capt.  Nehcminh  Rice, 

Elijah  Steele, 

John  Stoddard, 

John  Smith, 

Isaac  Smith, 

Levi  Smith, 

Allen  Smith, 

Samuel  Smith, 

Lue  Smith, 

Maj.  David  Smith, 

John  Saxton, 

Samuel  Strickland, 

Ezekiel  Scott, 

Uri  Scott, 


Serg.  Stephen  Scott, 
Ansel  Spencer, 
Elisha  Spencer, 
Asa  Sawyer, 
Nathan  Seward, 
Stephen  Scovill, 
Timothy  Scovill, 
Ezekiel  Sanford, 
Stephen  Seymour, 
William  Southmayd, 
Ezekiel  Tuttle, 
Jabez  Tuttle, 
Timothy  Tuttle, 
Ens.  Timothy  Tuttle, 
Hezekiah  Tuttle, 
Asa  Thayer, 
Capt.  Josiah  Terrell, 
Ichabod  Terrell, 
Joel  Terrell, 
Jared  Terrell, 
Thomas  Terrell, 
Israel  Terrell, 
Isaac  Terrell, 
Elihu  Terrell, 
William  Turner, 
Ezekiel  Upson, 
Benjamin  Upson, 
Stephen  Upson, 
Benjamin  Wooster, 
Edward  Warren, 
Samuel  Welton, 
James  Welton, 
Stephen  Welton,  Jr., 
Job  Welton, 
Increase  Wade, 
Samuel  Woodruif, 
Lambert  Woodruff, 
Edward  Woodruff, 
Capt.  John  Woodruff, 
Abel  Woodward, 
Thomas  Warden, 
Bartholomew  Williams 
Obadiah  Williams, 
Philemon  Wilcox, 
Stephen  Warner, 
Justus  Warner. 


Thomas  Hickox  (of  Westbury)  and  Ezra  Bronson  were  purchasing  commissaries 
the  first  during  most  of  the  war,  and  the  last  in  1782  and  afterwards. 


HISTOEY   OF   WATEEBUET.  351 

In  tlie  rev  J  commencement  of  the  war,  the  Eojalists  or 
Tories  of  Waterhury,  by  their  acts  and  words,  aroused  tlie 
jealousy  of  the  Whigs.  Tliere  was,  at  that  time,  within  tlie 
bounds  of  the  iirst  society,  two  military  companies.  One  of 
these  was  commanded  by  "Wliigs.  All  the  ofhcers  of  the  other, 
M-ith  the  exception  of  one  sergeant,  were  Tories,  and  took  no 
pains  to  disguise  their  sentiments.  The  General  Court,  as 
early  as  June,  177-1,  appointed  a  committee  to  examine  into 
the  facts  and  report.  Thomas  Mathewson  (Matthews  ?)  and 
Timothy  Judd  were  the  committee.  The  next  year,  a  formal 
complaint  was  made  of  their  commanding  officer  to  the  As- 
sembly by  certain  members  of  the  company,  Whigs,  as  follows : 

To  the  Honorable  General  Assembly,  to  be  holden  at  New  Haven,  on  the  2d 

Thursday  of  October,  A.D.  1775. 

The  memorial  of  the  subscribers,  inhabitants  of  Waterbury,  within  the  limits 
of  the  military  company  or  train-band  under  the  command  of  Capt.  Hezekiah 
Brown,  humbly  showeth — That  your  memoriahsts,  sensible  of  the  importance  of 
supporting  the  natural  and  chartered  rights,  liberties,  privileges  and  properties  of 
the  inhabitants  of  the  American  colonies,  and  anxious  to  find  any  person  or 
persons  unfriendly  to  the  continental  method  of  defending  said  colonies,  think 
ourselves  obliged  to  inform  your  Honors  that  the  said  Brown  is  disaffected  with, 
and  unfriendly  to,  the  present  method  advised  by  the  Continental  Congress,  and 
adopted  by  your  Honors,  for  the  common  defence ;  which  fully  appears  by  th  e 
following  sentence  pronounced  by  said  Brown,  in  the  hearing  of  sundry  people, 
at  sundry  times,  viz :  that  the  Congress  ought  to  be  punished  for  putting  the 
country  to  so  much  cost  and  charge  ;  for  they  did  no  more  good  than  a  parcel  of 
squaws.  And  some  time  in  the  latter  end  of  May  last,  did  say,  that  he  did  not 
see  the  necessity  of  this  Colony  raising  soldiers,  as  it  was  unnecessary  expense^ 
and  the  Assembly  had  no  right  to  do  it ;  and  that  Boston  had  wrongfully  under- 
taken to  quarrel  about  the  tea,  and  we  had  no  hand  in  it ;  and  by  his  justifying 
his  brother  John  Brown  in  exclaiming  against  the  authority  of  this  Colony  for 
raising  men  to  defend  the  Colony ;  and  by  saying  that  our  General  Assembly  was 
as  arbitrary  as  the  pope  of  Rome,  when  they  cashiered  Capt.  Amos  Bronson  and 
Ensign  Samuel  Scovill ;  by  saying  that  the  Congress,  in  some  of  the  Articles  of 
their  Association,  was  as  arbitrary  as  ever  they  were  in  Rome.  And  soon  after 
the  battle  of  Lexington,  in  April  last,  by  saying  in  the  time  of  the  alarm,  that  he 
would  not  go  one  step  further  for  the  relief  of  the  people  in  Boston  than  he  was 
obliged  to  go. 

Therefore,  your  memorialists  would  humbly  observe,  that  as  all  military  officers 
in  this  Colony  hold  their  commissions  by  your  Honors'  authority,  solely  for  the 
purpose  of  defending  the  lives,  liberties  and  properties  of  the  people,  we  think 
it  is  very  inconsistent  that  any  person  should  hold  a  commission  who  is  in- 
clined to  use  his  influence  against  the  authority  that  granted  it ;  and  very  unsafe 
for  this  Colony  at  the  present  critical  and  important  crisis,  and  is  very  grievous  to 


852  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBrET. 

your  memorialists  to  be  under  tlie  command  of  an  officer  in  whom  we  cannot  con- 
fide. And  therefore  pray  your  Honors  to  grant  such  relief  as  your  wisdom  and 
justice  shall  direct;  and  we  as  in  duty  bound  shall  ever  pray.  Dated  at  Water- 
bury  the  3d  day  of  October,  A.  D.  1775. 

[Signed]  Joseph  Beach,  Phineas  Castle,  Daniel  Bronson,  Moses  Cook,  Amos 
Prichard,  Thomas  Bronson,  Jr.  [Historical  Collections  relating  to  the  War  of 
the  Revolution:  compiled  by  R.  R.  Hinman,  184:2,  p.  547.] 

A  warrant  was  served  upon  Brown  to  appear  and  answer  to 
the  cliarges  ;  but  no  decisive  action  appears  to  have  been  had. 
Afterwards,  however,  at  tlie  Maj  session  of  the  Legislature, 
on  information  that  Capt.  Brown  (of  the  12th  company  of  the 
10th  regiment,  then  commanded  by  Col.  James  Wordsworth) 
had  refused  to  obey  certain  orders  given  him  by  Jonathan 
Baldwin,  lieut.  colonel  of  the  regiment,  to  detach  men  for  the 
service,  said  Brown  was  ordered  to  be  arrested  and  brought 
before  the  Assembly  to  answer,  &c.  Col.  Baldwin  and  others 
were  summoned  as  witnesses.  After  a  full  hearing,  the  delin- 
quent officer  was  cashiered,  made  incapable  of  holding  milita- 
ry office,  and  his  company  disbanded.  Soon  after,  or  March 
23,  1777  (?),  Brown  left  Waterbury,  joined  the  royal  army  in 
Kew  York,  received  a  captain's  commission  and  before  long 
(Aug.  27,  1777)  died  among  his  new  friends.  His  real  estate 
was  improved,  and  his  personal  estate  forfeited  and  sold,  for 
the  benefit  of  the  commonwealth.  After  his  death,  the  real 
estate  was  restored  to  the  widow. 

In  December,  1775,  the  General  Assembly  of  Connecticut 
enacted  laws  to  punish  persons  inimical  to  the  rights  and  lib- 
erties of  the  Colony  or  the  united  colonies.  To  supply  the  en- 
emy ("  the  ministerial  army  or  navy ")  with  provisions,  or 
militar}^  or  naval  stores  ;  to  give  them  information  ;  to  enlist 
into  their  service  or  to  persuade  others  to  do  so ;  to  pilot  or 
assist  their  naval  vessels,  or  to  take  up  arms  against  the  Colo- 
ny or  the  united  colonies,  was  punished,  on  conviction  before 
the  Superior  Court,  by  a  forfeiture  of  estate  for  the  use  of  the 
Colony,  and  imprisonment  not  exceeding  three  years.  If  a 
person  spoke  or  wrote  against,  libeled  or  defamed,  the  resolves 
of  Congress  or  the  acts  of  the  Assembly,  he  was  to  be  disarm- 
ed and  disqualified  for  office,  and  be  imprisoned,  disfranchised 
or  fined,  at  the  discretion  of  the  Court,  he  to  give  surety  for 


^tCD 


IlfSTOKY    OF    WATEKBUKY.  353 

niy's  army  or  navy,  or  aided  in  tlie  execution  of  the  ministerial 
measures  against  the  colonies,  his  estate  was  to  be  attached  and 
improved  for  the  benefit  of  the  Colony,  The  selectmen  and  com- 
mittee of  inspection  were  authorized  to  cause  any  person,  com- 
plained of  as  inimical  to  the  liberties  of  the  people  to  be  brought 
before  them  and  disarmed,  if  he  could  not  disprove  the  charge. 
At  the  next  session,  in  May,  the  old  colonial  law"  against  high 
treason  was  repealed,  "  every  part  and  paragraph  thereof." 

After  the  declaration  of  Independence,  the  first  act  that  was 
passed  b^^  the  Legislature  was  one  against  high  treason,  in  which 
the  "State  "  and  the  "  United  States  of  America  "  took  the  place 
of  "our  Sovreign  Lord  and  King."  Death  was  the  penalty  of 
levying  war  against  the  government,  betraying  it,  furnishing 
its  enemies  with  arms  or  intelligence,  &c.,  &c.  To  attempt  to 
join  the  enemies  of  the  State  or  United  States;  to  try  to  per- 
suade any  person  to  aid,  assist,  or  comfort  them,  or  to  have 
knowledge  of  persons  doing  the  same  and  concealing  it,  was 
punished  by  fine,  and  imprisonment  not  exceeding  ten  years. 

In  February,  1781,  still  more  stringent  laws,  aimed  at  what 
is  called  "  freedom  of  speech  and  the  press,"  were  passed.  One 
enacted  that  if  any  person,  being  a  citizen,  "should  by  writing 
profess  or  declare  that  the  king  of  Great  Britain  hath  or  of  right 
ought  to  have,  any  authority  or  dominion  in  or  over  this  State, 
or  the  inhabitants  thereof,  or  that  he  or  they  owe  allegiance  to 
the  said  king  within  the  same,"  &c.,  he  shall  be  "put  to  death." 
Another  law  enacted  that  if  any  citizen  shall  "  by  words  profess 
or  declare  that  the  king  of  Great  Britain  hath  or  of  right 
ought  to  have  any  authority  or  dominion  in  and  over  this 
State,"  ttc,  (the  same  words  are  used  as  in  the  other  law,)  he 
"  shall  suffer  imprisonment  in  ISTewgate  during  thepresent  war."' 

Be  it  said,  to  the  credit  of  Connecticut,  that  its  laws  di- 
rected against  the  enemies  of  the  Kevolution  were  less  severe 
than  in  most  of  the  other. States, 

In  the  course  of  the  year  177^,  after  the  defeat  of  the  Amer- 
ican forces  on  Long  Island,  when  the  British  army  was  lying 
in  and  about  ISTew  York,  the  patriot  cause  looking  desperate 
enough,  about  eighty  persons,  Eoyalists,  left  Waterbury  with 
the  intention  of  joining  the  enemy.  Some  were  taken  on  the 
wav  by  the  Americans,  but  most  of  them  reached  their  desti- 
23 


354:  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 

nation.  They  did  not,  however,  meet  witli  the  reception  they 
expected.  Instead  of  being  welcomed  and  petted,  they  were 
treated  with  snperciliousness  and  neglect.  The  disci^jline  of 
the  army  they  found  almost  intolerable,  and  a  thorough  disgust 
for  their  new  friends  soon  took  the  place  of  former  admiration. 
Many,  taking  advantage  of  the  proclamations  hy  Congress  of 
pardon  to  such  as  should  retnrn  to  duty,  deserted  the  royal  stan- 
dard, came  home  and  took  the  oath  of  allegiance  to  the  State. 
A  part  of  these  entered  the  x\merican  service.  Numbers  died  or 
were  killed  wdiile  still  with  the  British  army.  A  few  served  in 
it  till  the  close  of  the  war.  Of  the  latter  number,  a  part,  after 
peace  was  declared,  settled  in  N'ova  Scotia.  Others  found  a  home 
in  the  southern  states,  while  two  or  three  returned  to  Waterbury. 
The  following  list  embraces  the  names  of  persons  who  left 
AVaterbury  during  the  Revolutionary  war,  with  the  intention 
of  joining  the  enemy.     The  list  is  not  complete  : 

John  Baxter ;  returned  to  Waterbury. 

Daniel  Benham. 

Asa  Blakeslee ;  left  Waterbury  Dec.  4,  17*76.  His  father,  David,  who  encour- 
aged him  to  go,  was  assessed  for  the  support  of  a  soldier  in  the  American  army, 
but  died  before  the  tax  was  collected. 

John  Blakeslee  ;   died  on  Long  Island  while  with  the  British. 

Zealous  Blakeslee. 

Bela  Bronson ;  left  Waterbury  Dec.  10,  1776.  His  personal  estate  was  confis- 
cated.    He  died  on  Long  Island  with  the  British. 

David  Brown,  son  of  Daniel ;   died  with  the  British  in  New  York. 

Capt.  Hezekiah  Brown.     (See  p.  351.) 

Levi  Brown  ;   died  with  the  British. 

Zera  Brown,  son  of  Capt.  Hezekiah.  He  went  away  with  his  father  (and 
through  his  influence)  in  1776,  and  joined  the  enemy  on  Long  Island.  The  father 
died,  and  the  son,  "  convinced  of  his  error,"  returned  to  Waterbury  and  gave 
himself  up  to  the  civil  authority.  He  was  fined  by  the  Superior  Court  £30,  and  or- 
dered not  to  leave  the  town.  In  1783,  he  presented  a  petition  for  a  discharge — that 
he  might  labor  for  the  support  of  his  mother  in  Watertown,  which  was  not  granted. 

Noah  Candee,  or  Cambe  ;  estate  confiscated. 

Samuel  Doolittle.     His  estate  was  confiscated. 

James  Doolittle ;  estate  improved  for  the  benefit  of  the  State. 

John  Dowd  ;  joined  the  enemy  at  the  age  of  15  years;  was  ordered  to  go  south 
and  was  there  taken  prisoner.  He  was  confined  in  goal  15  months  in  Pennsylva- 
nia. His  father,  Jacob,  brought  a  petition  to  the  Assembly,  saying  that  his  son 
was  seduced  away,  and  was  now  willing  to  serve  his  country.  He  desired  that  he 
(the  son)  might  have  liberty  to  return  home.  The  request  was  granted,  bonds  to 
be  given  for  good  behavior. 

Samuel  Dowd. 


i 


HISTORY    OF   WATERS  URT.  355 

Moses  Dunbar.  He  went  to  the  enemy  and  returned  with  a  captain's  commis- 
sion, to  Northbury.  Against  the  entreaties  of  his  father,  brothers,  wife  and  child- 
ren, he  attempted  to  enlist  a  company  of  soldiers,  for  the  enemy's  service, 
and  was  taken  with  King  George's  commission  in  his  pocket.  He  was  convicted 
and  hung  in  Hartford,  March  19,  1777.  The  gallows,  in  a  public  place,  was  kept 
standing  for  a  long  time  as  a  warning  to  others. 

Elihu  Grilley,    \  sons  of  Jehula  ; 

Daniel  Grilley,  \  both  died  with  the  British. 

Dan  Finch ;  returned  before  the  close  of  the  war. 

William  Finch. 

Capt.  Abraham  Hickox.  He  left  Jan.  10,  1776,  entered  the  British  army  :  was 
ordered  south  in  1779,  and  was  finally  killed  in  battle.  He  had  been  a  deputy 
sheriff  in  Waterbury,  and  his  property  was  improved  for  the  benefit  of  the  State. 

Darius  Hickox;  returned  and  married  in  Waterbury. 

Joel  Hickox.  He  went  to  Long  Island  with  his  father,  in  1776,  and  on  his  sep- 
aration from  him,  "  made  a  cruise  in  the  boating  service,"  was  taken  prisoner  and 
confined  in  Newgate  during  the  pleasure  of  the  Court,  for  not  pleading  to  the 
indictment,  he  claiming  the  right  of  exchange  as  a  British  subject.  When  the 
prison  was  broken  open,  he  escaped  to  Long  Island,  whence  he  returned  in  ten 
days,  having  released  an  American  prisoner.  He  then  brought  a  petition  (from 
which  the  above  facts  are  gathered)  to  the  General  Court,  in  which  he  confessed 
his  error,  and  asked  to  be  released.  He  was  required  to  give  a  bond  of  £150  for 
good  behavior  and  appearance  at  Court,  he  to  remain  in  Waterbury. 

Reuben  Hickox  ;  returned  and  then  removed  to  Nova  Scotia. 

William  Hickox. 

Daniel  Killum ;  died  with  the  British. 

William  Maningirrous  ;  estate  confiscated. 

David  Manvil.  He  with  others,  Jesse  Tuttle  and  Epha  Warner,  joined  the  en- 
emy on  Long  Island,  served  them  till  Nov.  1777,  and  then  escaped.  They  were 
examined  by  Gen.  Parsons,  and  received  from  him  a  pass  to  return  home.  They 
were  then  committed  to  goal,  but  were  afterwards  suffered  to  go  at  large.  One 
of  them  enlisted  into  the  American  service.  They  brought  a  petition  to  the  As- 
sembly, in  which  they  asked  pardon  and  prayed  that  their  furniture  might  be  re- 
stored to  them.  The  request  was  granted,  and  the  officers  who  held  the  goods  in 
custody  were  authorized  to  return  them,  notwithstanding  their  seizure  and  con- 
demnation, the  petitioners  paying  the  costs  that  had  arisen. 

Mead  Merrell. 

Richard  Miles ;  estate  improved  for  the  benefit  of  the  State.  He  deserted  from 
the  British  service. 

Heman  Monson  ;  deserted  from  the  British  service.  A  prosecution  against  him 
was  dismissed  March,  1778. 

Daniel  Nichols ;  died  with  the  British. 

Isaac  Nichols ;  died  with  the  British,  in  1776. 

William  Nichols ;  estate  confiscated.  He  went  to  Nova  Scotia  after  the  war, 
and  there  died. 

Asahel  Parker ;  returned  to  Waterbury. 

Elisha  Parker;  died  with  the  British  of  small  pox. 

John  Parker  ;  died  with  the  British. 


356  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 

John  Porter. 

Timothy  Porter ;  returned  and  took  the  oath  of  fidelity  to  the  State. 

Elihu  Prichard  ;  died  with  the  British. 

Eliphalet  Prichard  of  Xorthbury  ;  returned  after  the  war. 

Thomas  Prichard;  died  with  the  British. 

Eli  Rowley  ;  deserted  from  the  British. 

Elijah  Scott. 

Noah  Scott. 

Timothy  Scovill;  returned,  and  enlisted  into  the  American  army. 

Isaac  Shelton  ;  returned. 

WiUiam  Seeley ;  returned. 

Jesse  Tuttle  ;  see  David  Manvil. 

Aaron  Warner ;  returned. 

David  Warner,  son  of  Aaron  ;  returned. 

Epha  Warner ;  see  David  Manvil.     He  took  the  oath  of  fidelity  in  Dec.  1111. 

Justus  Warner,  i  brothers  ;  were  taken  on  the  way   and   brough  back.     Justus 

Mark  Warner,    [  died  in  Liverpool,  April  16,  1856,  aged  100  years  and  20  days. 

Seth  Warner  ;  deserted  from  the  British. 

Eben  Way ;  returned. 

Titus  Way  ;  left  Dec.  4,  1776.     After  the  war  he  went  to  Nova  Scotia. 

Amasa  Welton  ;  remained  with  the  British  but  a  short  time ;  returned  and  took 
the  oath  of  fidelity. 

Arad  Welton  ;  went  to  the  south  and  there  married. 

Ezekiel  Welton;  estate  confiscated  ;' returned  after  the  war  and  removed  to 
Nova  Scotia. 

Noah  Welton. 

Stephen  Welton ;  returned  and  was  one  of  the  first  to  take  the  oath  of  fidelity. 

Benoni  Welton,  )  sons  of  Eliakini,  one  died  in  New  York,  and  the  other  while 

Moses  Welton,    )  serving  in  Burgoyne's  army. 

Daniel  Wooster. 

Oliver  Welton.  He  was  convicted  of  trying  to  enlist  Joel  Roberts  into  the  ene- 
my's service.  After  the  war,  as  his  conviction  rested  on  Roberts'  testimony 
alone,  he  petitioned  the  Assembly  to  discharge  him  from  the  execution.  The 
prayer  was  granted,  but  afterwards  the  vote  was  reconsidered  and  negatived.  The 
next  year,  (1786,)  on  petition,  he  had  liberty  to  pay  in  state  securities. 

[In  the  early  part  of  1780,  (March  14th,)  the  house  of  Capt.  Ebenezer  Dayton, 
of  New  Haven,  in  the  present  town  of  Bethany,  was  broken  into  and  robbed  in 
the  night,  by  a  party  of  seven  Royalists,  headed  by  one  Graham  ("  John  Luke, 
otherwise  called  Alexander  Graham ")  of  Long  Island.  Several  of  the  party 
belonged  to  Waterbury,  and  the  affair  made  quite  a  stir.  Dayton  was  a  Whig, 
had  lived  on  Long  Island,  and  was  charged  (without  foundation,  it  is  alleged)  with 
having  been  concerned  in  a  robbery  there.  He  was  known  to  have  money  (which 
appeared  to  have  been  the  main  object  of  the  burglars)  and  was  absent  in  Boston  at 
the  time.  Nobody  was  in  the  house  except  Mrs.  Dayton  and  several  children.  Her 
hands  were  tied  and  her  life  threatened,  if  she  made  the  least  noise.  £450 
in  gold  and  silver  were  carried  ofl'  and  much  property  destroyed,  the  whole  loss 
being  nearly  £5,000.  After  leaving  the  house,  the  robbers  came  north  and  were 
.secreted  for  several  days,  in  the  houses  of  David  and  Thomas  Wooster  in  Gunn- 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBUEY.  357 

town.  Afterwards  they  lay  hid  in  a  barn  of  Esq.  John  Wooster,  (brother  of  Da- 
vid and  Thomas,)  in  Oxford.  They  finally  fled,  and  took  a  boat  at  Stratford  for 
Long  Island.  The  people  of  Waterbury  and  of  other  towns  rallied  and  gave  chase. 
The  fugitives,  all  but  one,  were  taken  (says  the  Connecticut  Journal  of  the  time)  on 
the  Island,  when  they  had  nearly  reached  the  British  lines.  They  were  brought 
back,  examined  before  Esq.  Hopkins,  tried,  condemned  and  sent  to  Newgate. 
Several  of  them — Jesse  Cady,  Noah  Cande,  David  Wooster,  Jr.,  and  Samuel  Doo- 
little  (probably)  were  of  Waterbury.  Henry  Wooster,  Jr.,  one  of  the  party, 
was  of  Derby.  Doolittle,  18  years  of  age,  was  sentenced  for  your  years,  and  was 
to  pay  a  fine  of  £50  and  costs.  He  petitioned  for  a  commutation  of  punishment, 
on  the  ground  that  he  was  young,  and  was  "seduced"  by  Graham.  His  prayer 
was  not  granted.  David  Wooster,  Sen.,  was  fined  £500,  the  amount  of  his  entire 
property.  The  prisoners,  with  others,  finally  (May,  I'JSl)  broke  goal  and  escaped. 
A  prison  sentry  was  killed.  David  Wooster,  Jr.,  (who  held  a  musket  to  Mrs. 
Dayton's  head,  threatening  her  life,)  was  taken  and  confined  in  Hartford  goal.  He 
brought  a  petition  for  a  release,  in  which  he  asked  pardon,  pleaded  his  youth, 
(being  at  the  time  of  the  robbery  but  17  years  of  age,)  claimed  that  he  was  se- 
duced by  Graham,  and  offered  to  enlist  into  the  army.  He  was  released  on  £150 
bond,  and  permitted  to  live  in  some  town  on  the  east  side  of  Connecticut  Kiver. 
Afterwards,  he  was  released  from  his  bond,  and  allowed  to  reside  west  of  the 
river,  (with  a  permit  from  Gen.  Spencer,)  when  he  returned  home.  He  died  a 
few  years  ago.] 

The  main  east  and  west  road  tlirongli  the  town  of  "Water- 
buiy,  communicating  with  Hartford  and  Middletown  east- 
ward, and  with  Fishkill  and  the  Hudson  river,  by  way  of 
Breakneck  Ilill  in  Middleburj,  westward,  was  much  used  in 
the  Revohitionaiy  war,  (as  it  had  been  in  previous  wars,)  for 
the  passage  of  troops  and  the  transportation  of  stores.*  It  was 
the  most  southern  of  the  traveled  roads,  at  a  safe  distance 
from  the  sea,  (the  sea  was  in  possession  of  the  enemy,)  which 
connected  New  England  with  the  west  and  south.  Teams  for 
carrying  goods  and  supplies  ran  frequently  and  regularly  to 
and  from  Fishkill.  In  the  fall  of  1777,  after  the  capture  of 
Burgoyne,   a   detachment   of  the  American   army  with  the 

*  In  July,  1780,  the  town  directed  the  selectmen  to  petition  the  General  Assembly  "  to  make 
provision  for  cost  arising  by  soldiers  when  sick  on  the  road  to  and  from  the  army,  belonging  to 
this  State." 

Small  pox  prevailed  extensively  in  the  American  army  and  was  communicated  to  the  Wa- 
terbury people.  On  account  of  several  deaths  from  tlie  disease,  a  town  meeting  was  called  in 
March,  1778,  to  consider  the  expediency  of  inoculation.  Liberty  to  inoculate,  under  certain 
restrictions,  was  granted  in  September.  A  like  liberty  was  given  in  Feb.  1782.  to  all  the  males 
of  the  town  over  ten  years  of  age,  and  to  all  people  living  on  the  continental  (or  main  east  and 
west)  road,  till  the  20th  of  March  then  ensuing.  Afterwards,  April,  17S4,  permission  was  given 
to  Dr.  Abel  Bronson  to  erect  a  building  and  practice  inoculation  for  smallpox.  He  availed 
himself  of  the  privilege,  and  established  a  pest  house  in  Middlebury,  which  became  somewhat 
famous. 


358  HISTORY    OF    WATEKBUKY. 

enemy's  splendid  train  of  artillery  passed  over  this  road  to  the 
eastward.  They  pitched  their  tents  and  encamped  for  a  night 
in  Manhan  Meadow,  just  above  the  bridge.  Many  people 
visited  the  ground  to  see  the  beautiful  brass  field  pieces,  all 
ranged  in  a  line. 

Gen.  La  Fayette,  once  during  the  war,  perhaps  more  than 
once,  passed  through  "VVaterbury.  He,  at  one  time,  attended 
only  by  his  aids,  lodged  at  the  house  of  Capt.  Isaac  Bronson, 
at  Breakneck,  who  then  kept  tavern.  The  host  introduced 
him  to  his  best  chamber,  in  which  was  his  best  bed.  But  La 
Fayette  caused  the  feather  bed  to  be  removed,  saying  "  straw 
for  the  soldier ;"  and  made  the  straw  imderbed  his  couch  for 
the  night.  He  also,  on  one  occasion,  stopped  at  the  house  of 
Esq.  (Joseph)  Hopkins,  then  the  most  prominent  civilian  in 
the  place.  He  is  described  as  a  slender,  handsome  youth,  wdio 
sat  a  horse  beautifully,  and  altogether  made  a  fine  appearance. 
I  am  unable  to  say  whether  or  not  his  visits  at  Isaac  Bronson's 
and  Esq.  Hopkins'  occurred  in  the  same  journey.  In  the  sum- 
mer of  1778,  La  Fayette  was  detached  by  Washington  from 
the  continental  army  near  New  York  to  go  to  Rhode  Island 
to  assist  to  expel  the  British  from  Newport.  The  enterprise 
failed,  and  in  the  fall.  La  Fayette  returned  to  the  Hudson  river, 
met  Washington  at  Fishkill,  and  soon  sailed  for  Europe.  In 
these  journeys  to  and  from  Rhode  Island,  it  would  have  been 
most  natural  for  him  to  pass  by  way  of  Fishkill,  Waterbury, 
Middletown,  &c. 

Gen.  Washington  passed  through  Waterbury,  certainly  once, 
on  his  way  to  Hartford.  He  had  with  him  Gen.  Knox  and  a 
somewhat  numerous  escort.  He  rode  a  chestnut  colored  horse, 
came  across  Breakneck,  and  returned  the  salutations  of  the 
boys  by  the  road  side.  His  dignity  of  manner,  set  ofi*  by  his 
renown,  made  a  durable  impression  on  all  who  beheld  him. 
He  dined  w^ith  Esq.  Hopkins,  whose  house  stood  on  the  site  of 
S.  M.  Buckingham's  dwelling.  An  anecdote  is  told  of  him 
which  may  be  true,  though  it  conflicts  somewhat  with  the  well 
known  benevolence  of  his  character.  Mr.  Hopkins  made 
many  inquiries,  and  at  last  became  decidedly  inquisitive. 
After  reflecting  a  little  on  his  last  question,  Washington  said — 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY.  359 

"Mr.  Hopkins,  Ccan  you  keep  a  secret?" — "I  can." — "So  can 
I,"  tlie  General  instantly  replied. 

Tliis  visit  of  "Washington  to  Waterbury  must  have  occurred 
while  on  one  of  his  journeys  to  Hartford  to  consult  with 
Count  Rochambeau  and  the  French  officers  concerning 
the  conduct  of  the  war.  These  consultations  occurred,  the 
first,  late  in  September,  1780,  and  the  other,  late  in  May, 
1781.  It  is  supposed  to  have  been  in  September,  1780,  that 
"  the  father  of  his  country  "  was  in  Waterbury ;  but  it  may  have 
been  in  May,  '81.  Possibly  he  was  here  at  both  times ;  for  it 
is  alledged  that  he  passed  through  Waterbur}-  at  least  twice. 
Perhaps  he  took  our  town  on  his  way  to  and  from  Newport  in 
March,  1781.  On  the  sixteenth  of  that  month  he  was  in 
Hartford,  on  his  return  to  the  army.  In  the  summer  of  1778, 
"Washington  lay  on  the  Hudson  River,  while  Sullivan  was  in 
Rhode  Island,  as  already  suggested.  Waterbury  was  in  the 
line  of  communication. 

I  have  thus  indicated  the  diflTerent  times  when  Washington 
may  have  found  it  convenient  to  pass  through  Waterbury, 
without  intending,  positively,  to  affirm  that  he  visited  the 
town  more  than  once. 

In  the  latter  part  of  June,  1781,  the  French  army  under 
Count  Rochambeau,  in  their  march  from  Newport  westward 
and  south  to  join  Washington  in  his  operations  against Cornwal- 
lis  in  "Virginia,  passed  through  Waterbury.  They  are  said  to 
have  marched  in  four  divisions,  and  to  have  encamped,  for  a 
night,  just  over  the  mountain  in  Southington,  at  a  place  since 
called  French  Hill.  After  the  surrender  of  Cornwallis,  or  in 
October,  1782,  they  returned  by  the  same  route,  in  two  divis- 
ions, (probably,)  in  order  to  embark  for  the  West  Indies.  An 
old  inhabitant  says  they  marched  two  and  two,  and  when  the 
head  of  the  column  had  disappeared  beyond  the  hill  at  Capt. 
George  Nichols',  the  other  extremity  had  not  come  in  sight  on 
West  Side  Hill,  The  Middlebury  people  say  that,  at  both 
times,  they  encamped  on  Breakneck  Hill,  making  Isaac 
Bronson's  house  bead  quarters.  On  one  of  these  occasions, 
probably  the  last,  they  stayed  over  one  day  to  wash,  bake,  &c. 
All  the  wells  in  the  neighborhood  were  drawn  dry,  and  the 


860  HI6T0KY    OF   WATERBURY. 

people,  far  and  near,  were  employed,  with  tlieir  teams,  to  cart 
water  from  Hop  Brook.* 

[The  following  items  relating  to  the  Revolutionary  period  may  as  well  perhaps 
be  introduced  here.] 

April,  1777.  An  order  on  Isaac  Doolittle,  for  C25  lbs.  of  powder,  was  given  to 
the  selectmen  of  Waterbury  by  the  council  of  safety. — [Hiuman's  Rev.  War- 
p.  436.] 

Of  the  militia  which  the  General  Assembly,  in  May,  1779,  ordered  to  be 
raised  immediately,  Waterbury  was  to  furnish  ten. 

At  the  October  session  of  the  same  year,  the  Assembly  resolved  to  raise  wheat 
and  rye  or  meslin  for  the  army,  and  assigned  to  Waterbury,  as  its  proportion, 
360  bushels  of  wheat  and  200  bushels  of  rye  or  meslin. 

In  1780,  Abner  Johnson,  apothecary,  asked  of  the  Legislature  liberty  to  trans- 
port to  Boston  one  ton  of  wheat  flour  and  three  barrels  of  pork,  which  he  wished 
to  exchange  for  medicine  that  could  not  be  otherwise  obtained.  The  request  was 
not  granted.  [In  order  to  increase  the  supply  at  home,  the  carrying  of  provis- 
ions out  of  the  State  was  forbidden  by  law.] 

State  of  Connecticut  to  Watertown  Select  Men,  Dr. 

To  sundry  provisions,  &c.,  furnished  the  men  under  the  command  of  Lieut. - 
Col.  Richards  ordered  for  the  relief  of  West  Point,  viz : 

£     s.     d. 

To  707  lbs.  wheat  flour,  @  3d 8  16     9 

To  5U  lbs.  salt  pork,  @  Is 25  U     0 

To  1  pork  barrel 7     0 

To  2  large  flour  barrels lu     0 

3.3     7  9 

To  commission,  @  5  p.  c 1   1.5  4 

To  2  men  and  horses  to  bring  tents,  &c.,  from  Waterbury 4  0 

To  2  teams,  4  cattle  each,  to  transport  the  above  provisions,  tents, 

&c.,  to  Ridgefield,  being  forty  miles  @  2s.  6d.  per  mile  each  ..    10     4  0 

Lawful  money  £47     7     U 
— [Revolutionary  Papers,  Vol.  XYIL] 

The  names  of  forty-six  soldiers  who  had  been  in  the  army  previous  to  Jan.  1, 
1780,  are  given,  [Revolutionary  Papers,  Vol.  XXX,]  whose  families  received  supplies 
from  the  town. 

The  names  of  twenty-one  persons  are  mentioned  whose  families  received  supplies 
in  1780.  Eleven  of  them  were  of  Watertown,  (which  included  Northbury  till  1795.) 

In  May,  1781,  Watertown  was  called  on  for  twelve  men  for  Horse  Neck. 

In  the  same  year,  the  names  of  ten  soldiers  are  given  whose  families  received 
supplies  from  the  town,  five  of  whom  were  of  Watertown. 

Feb.  21,  1781.     Whereas  the  officers  and  soldiers  employed  in  the  defense  of 

*  Manuscript  letter  from  Dea.  Leonard  Bronson. 

Cothren  seems  to  have  fallen  into  error  in  supposing  that  La  Fayette  commanded  the  French 
army. 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUEY.  361 

this  and  the  United  States  have  suffered  much  by  want  of  the  article  of  sauce,  so 
necessary  for  their  health  and  comfort,  which  inconvenience  cannot  be  remedied 
except  by  the  exertions  of  the  people  : 

Therefore  resolved  [by  the  Assembly]  That  it  be  recommended  to  the  inhabit- 
ants of  the  several  towns  in  this  State,  that  they  remember  their  brethren  in  the 
field,  and  endeavor  the  next  season  to  raise  a  quantity  of  peas  and  beans,  suffi- 
cient to  supply  the  officers  and  soldiers  in  public  service  belonging  to  this  State, 
for  which  they  shall  receive  a  generous  reward. 

And  the  several  printers  in  this  State  are  requested  to  publish  this  resolve. — 
[Connecticut  Courant,  March  27,  1781.] 

Jan.  1782,  Waterbury  was  ordered  to  provide  four  footmen  and  one  horseman 
for  the  continental  army,  and  AVatertown  five  footmen  and  one  horseman. 

1782.  The  following  persons  were  returned  as  deserters  by  Col.  Elisha  Shel- 
don, viz  :  Richard  Lawrence  of  Waterbury  and  Jarcd  Humaston  and  James  Ful- 
ford  of  Watertown. 

April  12,  1784,  the  town  appointed  Aaron  Benedict,  Mr.  Prichard  and  Samuel 
Bronson  a  committee  "  to  examine  three  five  pound  notes  given  by  Ozias  Cyrus 
and  Zibe  Norton  to  the  treasurer  for  a  fine  for  not  performing  a  tower  of  duty 
when  draughted,  and  to  settle  with  them  and  the  treasurer." 

At  the  same  meeting,  the  town  directed  "the  selectmen  to  dispose  of  the 
pots,  tents,  camp  equipage,  &c.,  belonging  to  the  town." 

Sept.  25,  1783,  the  town  chose  Messrs.  Aaron  Benedict,  Andrew  Culver,  Capt. 
Samuel  Upson  and  Capt.  John  AVelton  delegates  to  a  convention  to  be  held  at 
Middletown  the  30th  of  September,  then  instant,  "  to  obtain  a  redress  of  grievan- 
ces on  account  of  the  commutation  of  five  years  half  pay  granted  to  the  officers  of 
the  continental  army  in  lieu  of  half  pay  for  life." 


CHAPTER  XXIL 


AFTER  THE  AVAR :    MISCELLANEOUS  ITEMS. 

The  surrender  of  Cornwallis  at  Yorktown,  in  Oct.  ITSl, 
Tirtnally  closed  the  war ;  but  peace  was  not  finally  proclaimed 
till  April,  1783.  The  country  came  out  of  the  conflict  thor- 
oui^hly  exhausted.  Waterbury  was  poorer  than  ever.  During 
the  struggle,  Westbury  and  Korthbury,  its  richest  portions, 
had  been  made  into  a  new  town.  Tlie  poverty  of  her  agricul- 
ture promised  a  slow  and  uncertain  recovery.    Old  people  tell, 


362  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBURY. 

or  used  to  tell,  a  sad  tale  of  those  days.  In  1774,  the  population 
of  the  whole  town  was  3,526  and  its  grand  list  £39,826,  18s. 
In  1779,  the  grand  lists  of  the  different  societies  stood,  accord- 
ing to  my  notes  taken  from  the  State  papers  in  Hartford,  as 
follows,  viz:  Waterbury,  £12,181,  17s.,  6d.  ;  Westbnry, 
£13,427,  10s.  9d.  ;  Northbnry,  £10,070,  15s.  lOd.  ;  Farming- 
bury,  £2,862,  12s.  6d.;  Salem,  £5,657,  12s.  3d.  Total, 
£44,200,  8s.  lOd. 

This  last  sum,  in  consequence,  perhaps,  of  abatements  not 
being  deducted  and  the  whole  of  Farmingbury  being  included, 
exceeds  very  considerably  the  amount  regularly  returned  for 
the  entire  town  in  that  year,  which  is  £38,504,  18s.  9|^d. 

In  1790,  the  population  of  Waterbury  was  2,937  and  of 
Watertovvn  3,170,  in  the  whole  6,107;  an  increase  of  73  per 
cent,  since  1774,  the  greatest  part  of  it  probably  in  "Water- 
town.  The  grand  list  of  Waterbury,  in  this  year,  stood  as  fol- 
lows, viz :  first  society,  £12,093,  12s.  lOd. ;  Farmingbury, 
£2,401,  3s.  9d. ;  Salem,  £5,302,  3s.  6d.  Total,  £19,797,  Os. 
Id.,  about  the  same  as  in  1782,  but  £3,000  more  than  in  1788. 

In  1800  the  population  of  Waterbury  had  risen  to  3,256, 
notwithstanding  several  hundred  people  had  been  lost  when 
Wolcott  and  Oxford  were  incorporated.  Watertown  contain- 
ed, at  this  time,  1,615  souls  and  Plymouth  1,791 ;  together, 
3,406.  The  three  towns  numbered  6,662,  to  which  an  impor- 
tant addition  should  be  made  of  those  set  off  with  Wolcott  and 
Oxford.  There  must  have  been,  in  1800,  within  the  limits  of 
original  Waterbury,  over  7,000  persons. 

There  is  to  be  found  among  the  papers  in  the  town  clerk's 
office  a  series  of  taxable  lists  of  the  first  society  of  Waterbury 
and  of  Salem  society,  commencing  in  1782,  from  which  much 
instruction  may  be  gathered.  I  will  give  some  extracts  from 
the  list  of  the  first  society,  (which  then  included  present  Wa- 
terbury and  those  parts  of  Middlebnry  and  Prospect  which 
belouged  to  the  old  town,)  bearing  date  Aug.  20,  1783,  the 
first  year  after  the  peace.  Here  is  the  summary  of  polls  and 
estate.  The  items  were  put  in  at  a  fixed  rate  regulated  by 
statute. 


HISTORY   OF   AVATEEBURY. 


363 


Polls— above  21  years,  No.  189  at  £18     £3,402   00s.  OOd. 

"        under          "  "  54  "  9  486    00  00 

Xeat  Cattle— Oxen,  "  237  "  4  948    00  00 

Cows  and  3  year  olds,  "  516  "  3  1,548   00  00 

"             2  year  olds,  "  159  "  2  318    00  00 

"             1  year  olds,  "  108  "  1  198    00  00 

Horses— 3  year  olds  and  upwards,  "  270  "  3  810   00  00 

2  year  olds,  "  14  "  2  28    00  00 

"         1  year  olds,  "  14  "  '     1  14    00  00 

Swine,  "  363  "  1  363    00  00 

Houses,*  "  135        "Price,"  124    19  07 

Inclosed  land — plough  land,        acres"  1850^  at  10s.,  925    05  00 

"  upland  meadow 

and  pasture,        "      "  2425|^      "  8  970    5  05 1 
lowland,                  "      "  512^  "  7s.  6d.  192    ()3  09 
"              bog-meadow,         "      "  54^  "  £5  13    12  06 
bush-pasture,         "      "  2938^  "  2   •        293   07  00 
Uainclosed  land— 1st  rate,             "      "  2221^%  "  2  '222   03  09f 
"               2d     "                 "      "  3141  "  1  157    01  00 
3d     "                "      "  1271^  "  6d.  31    15  lOi 
Clocks,  &c. — steel   and  brass- 
wheeled  clocks,         "  4  "  £3  12   00  00 
"           wooden  clock,                  "  1  "  1  1    10  00 
"           watches,                            "  7  "  1    10s.    10    10  00 
"           riding  chair,                     "  1  "  3  3   00  00 
"           silver  plate,  20  ounces  and  10  pennyweights, 

["  at  6  p.  c.  on  the  just  value  thereof,"]  8   02  00 

Money  on  interest,                         £33  at  6  p.  c.  2   00  00 

Total,        £11,075    02    Olyg- 
In  dollars,  at  $3  33^  to  the  pound,  $36,917  02.f 

*  "  Each  dwelling  house  in  good  repair  [was  assessed]  at  fifteen  shillings  for  each  fireplace 
therein,"  and  the  listers  might  "  abate  for  old  and  decayed  houses  one  quarter,  one  half,  or  three 
quarters  of  the  sum  aforesaid,"  «&c. 

t  It  may  be  interesting  to  compare  the  above  figures  with  the  following,  as  published  in  the 
Waterbury  American  : 

List  of  Polls  and  Taxable  Property  in  the  Town  of  Waterbury,  ratable  by  Law  on 
THE  FIRST  Day  of  October,  1856, 

119"  1-2  Dwelling  Houses, $1,192,854  OO 

14,1113-4  Acres  of  Land 330,139  00 

28  1-4  Stores, 92,900  00 

89  Mills  and  Manufactories, 89,015  00 

353  Horses  and  Mules, 23,512  00 

1,228  Neat  Cattle, 28,213  00 

Sheep,  Swine  and  Poultry, 164  00 

Coaches,  Carriages  and  Pleasure  Wagons, 10,905  00 

Farming  Utensils,             50  00 

Clocks,  Watches  and  Jewelry, 10,733  00 

Piano  Fortes,  &c 10,251  00 

Furniture  and  Libraries, 8,800  00 

Bank  and  Insurance  Stock,            188,791  00 


56i 


HISTORY    OF   WATEKBURT. 


The  polls  of  all  male  persons  between  tlie  ages  of  sixteen 
and  seventy*  were  placed  in  the  list,  except  ministers  of  the 
Gospel,  professors  and  tutors  of  colleges,  constant  school-mas- 
ters, students  at  college,  persons  disabled  by  sickness  or  other 
infirmity,  &c.  The  estates  of  ministers  lying  in  their  own 
society  were  exempted,  and  the  polls  of  all  the  members  of 
their  families.  In  the  list  from  which  the  summary  is  taken 
there  are  in  all,  294  names,  including  10  of  females,  41  of  non- 
residents, and  53  of  residents,  whose  polls  are  not  entered. 
Add  the  53  non-taxable,  to  the  189  £18  polls,  and  we  have  a 
total  of  242  males  above  21  years  of  age,  all  of  whom,  except 
Moses  Frost,  Eichard  Nichols,  Jr.,  Selden  Scovill  and  Eben 
W.  Judd,  had  taxable  estate.  The  names  of  those  who  had 
the  largest  lists,  are  : 


Timothy  Clark, 

£16Y, 

3s 

Od. 

Stephen  Ives, 

£100, 

8s 

Od. 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

156, 

11 

8 

George  Nichols, 

98, 

9 

0 

Wid.  Abip;ail  Gunn, 

148, 

4 

6 

David  Bronson, 

98, 

6 

0 

John  Welton, 

135, 

lY 

6 

Nathaniel  Richardson 

96, 

4 

0 

Seba  Bronson, 

131, 

7 

6 

John  Thompson, 

92, 

11 

6 

Amos  Scott, 

124, 

7 

0 

Richard  Welton, 

92, 

4 

0 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

111, 

16 

6 

Isaac  Bronson,  Jr., 

92, 

3 

0 

Stephen  Bronson, 

109, 

3 

3 

James  Bronson, 

91, 

6 

6 

Benjamin  Upson, 

106, 

8 

6 

Abraham  Hotchkiss, 

90, 

19 

0 

Aaron  Benedict, 

102, 

18 

6 

Phineas  Porter, 

86, 

5 

0 

Manufacturing  Stock, $2,205,342  00, 

State  and  other  Stocks, 620  (10 

Railroad  and  other  Bonds, 9,790  00 

Amount  employed  in  Trade  and  Merchandising, 140,672  00 

Amount  employed  in  Mechanical  and  Manufacturing  Operations,     ....  111,00000 

Investment  in  Vessels  and  Commerce, 800  00 

Money  at  Interest, 180,886  00 

"      on  Deposit,           10,430  00 

All  other  Taxable  Property, 2,050  00 

Additions  by  Board  of  Relief, 10,617  00 

Amount,        $4,664,094  00 
Deduct  indebtedness,  Ac,  143,052  00 

$4,521,042  00 
Amount  of  Assessment  at  8  per  cent.,  135,631  26 

1772  Polls  at  ten  dollars  each,  17,720  00 

Taxable  amount  for  1856,  153.851  26 

792  Military  subjects  at  50  cents  each,  351  00 

*  One  of  the  great  principles  for  which  our  fathers  contended  in  the  war  which  had  just 

closed,  was  that  taxation  and  representation  should  go  together;  and  yet,  they  taxed  minors, 

as  they  always  had  done. 


HISTORY   OF 

WATEUBURY. 

y< 

Ezra  Hull, 

£86,    3s.  Od. 

James  Porter,  Jr., 

£85, 

8s.  Od. 

Thomas  Richardson, 

86,     2     6 

Samuel  Bronson, 

84, 

lU     0 

Eli  Bronson, 

86,     1     6 

David  Clark, 

7il, 

12     6 

Benjamin  Hine, 

85,  19     0 

Phineas  Castle, 

TS, 

2     0 

Joseph  Beach,  Jr., 

85,  14     0 

365 


Of  the  acres  of  land  listed,  Josepli  Hopkins  owned  the 
greatest  number,  442  standing  against  his  name.  Roger 
Prichard  owned  249,  Seba  Bronson  240,  Stephen  Bronson  233, 
Jonathan  Baldwin  217,  Wid.  Abigail  Gunn  213,  John  Weltou 
200,  Timothy  Chirk  196,  Aaron  Benedict  168,  Amos  Scott  163, 
Stephen  Ives  163,  Beiij.  Upson  119.  Of  inclosed  lands,  Roger 
Prichard  had  172  acres,  Seba  Bronson  150,  Wid.  Gunn  148, 
Joseph  Hopkins  144,  John  Weltou  122,  Jonathan  Baldwin 
114,  Stephen  Bronson  110,  Timothy  Clark  96,  Aaron  Bene- 
dict 88,  Amos  Scott  73,  Benjamin  Upson  69.  Of  the  1st  and 
2d  quality  of  inclosed  land,  Joseph  Hopkins  had  91  acres,  Seba 
Bronson  90,  John  Weltou  81,  AVid.  Gunn  74,  Timothy  Clark 
72,  Roger  Prichard  60,  Stephen  Bronson  53^,  Amos  Scott  50. 
Of  the  1st  quality  of  laud,  Seba  Bronson  seems  to  have  had 
the  greatest  number  of  acres,  and  the  most  valuable  farm.  He 
had  80  acres  of  first  quality  land,  John  Weltou  40,  Roger 
Prichard  34,  Benjamin  Upson  30,  Timothy  Clark  26,  Joseph 
Hopkins  25.  Of  uninclosed  land,  Joseph  Hopkins  had  298 
acres,  Lemuel  Nichols  had  160,  Stephen  Bronson  133,  Ste- 
phen Ives  120,  Jonathan  Baldwin  103. 

Now  let  us  look  at  the  luxuries  which  our  fathers  enjoyed. 
There  are,  in  the  list  of  which  I  have  been  speaking,  four 
steel  and  brass  clocks.  These  were  owned  by  Jonathan  Bald- 
win, Joseph  Beach,  Jr.,  Wid.  Abigail  Gunn  and  Joseph  Hop- 
kins, (who  was  a  watch-maker.)  There  are  also  seven  watches, 
(silver,)  and  these  were  the  property  (much  valued  doubtless) 
of  Ezra  Bronson,  Dr.  Abel  Bronson,  Wid.  Abigail  Gunn,  Jo- 
seph Hopkins,  Stephen  Ives,  Abner  Johnson  and  Ephraim 
Warner.  The  column  for  wooden  clocks  is  blank  excejjt  in  a 
single  instance.  Far  down,  against  the  name  of  Benjamin 
Upson,  the  space  is  filled  by  "  1."  This  rare  piece  of  mech- 
anism was  originally  the  property  of  Thomas  Clark,  (2d.)  It 
was  bought  by  Mrs.  Clark  for  their  convenience  in  keeping 
tavern,  as  early  as  1772,  and  cost  about  $20.     It  was  made  by 


366  HISTORY   OF   WATERBUKY. 

Solomon  Crittenden  of  Kent.  Abraham  Truck  of  Waterbury 
made  the  case.  It  is  thouglit  to  have  been  the  first  of  its 
kind  bronght  into  "VYaterburj. 

Mr.  Clark  died,  and  Benjamin  Upson  married  his  widow, 
in  Jan.  1781,  and  thus  came  into  possession  of  the  wooden 
clock.  It  is  the  only  one  that  appeared  on  the  taxable  lists 
till  after  1790.  Its  face,  with  the  maker's  name  on  it,  is  still 
in  existence  (or  was  a  short  time  since)  in  the  safe  keeping  of 
Mrs.  Anrelia  Clark,  the  daughter  of  Tliomas  Clark. 

The  only  wheeled  vehicle  of  any  sort  in  the  list,  is  "  a  rid- 
ing chair,"  set  down  to  the  account  of  Ezra  Bronson.  I  sup- 
pose it  was  a  two  wheeled  carriage  without  a  top,  for  a 
single  person,  which  the  owner,  who  was  much  engaged  in 
public  life,  used  in  business.  It  is  aflirmed  that  Parson 
Leavenworth  also  had  a  two  wheeled  carriage,  without  a 
top,  with  a  double  seat,  which,  being  exempted  from  taxation, 
does  not  appear  in  the  list ;  and  that  this  was  the  first  thing  of 
the  kind  which  was  owned  in  Waterbury.  Bronson's  "  chair  " 
is  on  the  lists  of  1783  and  1783,  but  after  that  disappears.  The 
column  for  carriages  is  then  wholly  blank  till  after  1791  ;  ex- 
cept, in  one  instance,  (1789,)  a  "  sulkey  "  is  entered  against  the 
names  of  the  administrators  of  George  Nichols. 

Joseph  Hopkins  owned  the  "  silver  j^late  "  which  is  men- 
tioned in  the  summary  I  have  given.  It  consisted,  probably, 
of  silver  spoons  of  his  own  manufacture.  No  other  person 
had  any  "  plate"  till  after  1791. 

The  person  who  stood  highest  in  the  town  list,  in  the  town 
of  "Waterbury,  in  1782,  and  for  several  years  afterwards,  so 
far  as  I  have  examined,  was  Jobamah  Gunn  of  Salem  society. 
In  1782,  he  owned  418  acres  of  land,  and  stood  in  the  list 
£191,  17s.  6d.  In  1791,  he  had  563  acres  of  land,  (363  of 
which  were  inclosed,)  and  stood  in  the  list  £245,  5s. 

Of  the  212  names  of  male  persons  over  21  years  of  age 
found  in  the  list  of  1783,  82  will  be  identified  as  those  of  orig- 
inal families,  representing  less  than  half  the  old  names.  Sev- 
eral of  them  were  not  descendants  of  the  first  settlers.  Of  the 
82,  there  are  of  the  names  of  Barnes  2,  Bronson  25,  Clark  2, 
Gaylord  1,  Ilickox  5,  Hopkins  2,  Judd  4,  Peck  1,  Porter  11, 
Richards  1,  Richardson  2,  Scott  7,  Scovill  6,  Upson  1,  "War- 
ner 7,  AYelton  5. 


HISTORY    OF    WATEEBUKY.  367 

Oil  the  list  of  the  voters  of  Waterhuiy,  publislied  in  the 
Waterbuiy  Amei'ican,  Oct.  24:,  1856,  all  the  above  names, 
with  the  exce^Jtion  of  Richardson,  are  found,  and  three  others 
that  were  borne  by  original  families.  I  give  the  number  of 
persons  represented  by  each  of  these  names,  as  thej  are  enter- 
ed in  the  American's  list.  There  are  of  the  name  of  Andrews 
4,  Barnes  1,  Eronson  22,  Carriiigton  1,  Clark  12,  Gajlord  1, 
Hickox  4,  Hopkins  1,  Judd  8,  Peck  T,  Porter  12,  Richards  1, 
Scott  10,  Scovill  5,  Stanley  2,  Upson  10,  Warner  20,  Welton 
20,  (including  in  the  last  number  live  names  printed  Welon.) 

The  adoption  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and 
the  organization  of  the  government  under  it,  in  1789,  put  a 
new  aspect  upon  affairs.  •  At  that  period,  our  existence  as  a 
nation,  and  our  greatest  good  and  prosperity  as  a  people,  began. 
The  blessings  of  that  constitution  were  felt  in  every  hamlet  of 
the  land  and  have  extended  to  the  present  time.  ISTo  sooner 
was  its  influence  perceived  than  order  came  out  of  confusion. 
Discord  was  exchanged  for  harmony,  uncertainty  for  confi- 
dence, poverty  for  plenty,  humiliating  and  confederated  weak- 
ness for  national  streno;th. 


[Tlie  i'ollowini^  miscellaneous  items,  being  chiefly  extracts  from  records,  for 
which  I  have  not  found  a  fitting  place,  in  the  preceding  pages,  I  introduce  here 
by  themselves.] 

Nov.  1-t,  170-2  ye  town  by  uoat  order  y'  y*  new  books  should  be  sold  in  j" 
town  to  ym  y'  will  by  ym  at  1»  6^  in  cash  or  half  a  bushill  of  wheat  down  payd 
to  ye  town  treasurer  only  y^  bound  book  to  be  keept  for  ye  town  yous  to  be  keept 
in  ye  hands  in  [of]  ye  justis  in  being  froin  time  to  time.  [The  preceding  vote 
seems  to  refer  to  certain  law  books,  copies  of  the  statutes,  doubtless,  received 
from  the  Assembly.  There  are  frequent  votes  ordering  the  sale  of  the  "  law 
books."] 

Jany  wary  6  1718-19  it  was  agreed  upon  by  note  to  grant  a  rattof  five  pounds 
as  money  to  be  raised  on  the  present  list  of  estat  as  a  town  stock  [or  charitable 
fund]  for  the  nesesity  of  the  pore  or  disstrakted  parsons  to  be  dissposed  of  at  the 
discrestion  of  the  present  townsmen  according  to  law. 

of  Buckshill  was  married  in   April,  1736,   and  his  first  child   was  born  in 

September  following.  For  his  misfortune,  he  and  his  wife  were  summoned  to 
appear  before  the  County  Court,  in  April,  1737,  to  show  cause,  &c.  Such  cases 
were  very  common  in  the  courts  100  years  ago.  The  penalty  was  £5  or  ten 
stripes  (for  each  offender,  I  suppose.)  Afterwards,  in  cases  in  which  married  oifend- 
ers  pleaded   guilty  on  trial,  the  courts  were  ordered  to  exact  but  half  the  penalty. 


363  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 

One  poor  fellow,  John  Tuttle,  of  New  Haven,  confessed  12  years  after  the  offense. 
His  confession  is  entered  on  the  N.  H.  County  Court  Record,  Vol.  II,  p.  486. 

Dec.  14,  1741,  the  prayers  of  Daniel  Scott,  Ebenezer  Elwell  and  Gideon  Allen  for 
the  abatement  of  their  fines  for  killing  deer  were  "negatived"  by  the  town.  March, 
1755,  Samuel  Warner  was  excused  from  paying  his  note  for  £2,  10s.,  given  for  kill- 
ing a  deer.  In  1765,  Zera  Bcebe's  note  for  £3,  given  for  destroying  a  deer  was  or- 
dered to  be  given  up.    The  town  was  equally  lenient  to  Samuel  Williams,  in  1767. 

Jan.  1756,  William  Selkrigg  of  Waterbury  was  killed  by  falling  with  a  stick  of 
wood  which  he  was  carrying  on  his  shoulder. 

June,  1760,  Miles  Wooster  and  Samuel  Spcrry  were  brought  before  a  justice's 
court  and  fined  each  3s.  for  "rude  and  profane  behaviour  between  meetings  in  the 
meeting  house  on  the  Lord's  day." 

December,  1760,  the  town  voted  to  give  a  premium  of  three  shillings  for  "kill- 
ing or  destroying  any  grown  wild  cat,  and  half  so  much  for  their  whelps,  and  two 
shillings  for  a  fox  and  half  so  much  for  their  whelps,"  the  selectman  or  men  to  cut 
off  the  right  ear  of  such  cat  or  fox  to  prevent  fraud. 

In  1761,  the  premium  on  wild  cats  was  raised  to  five  shillings,  and  on  their 
whelps  to  two  and  six  pence.     In  1763  and  1773,  Is.  only  was  paid  for  foxes. 

In  1765,  Isaac  Frazier  broke  into  the  shop  of  Joseph  Hopkins  and  stole  £123 
value  of  goldsmith's  work.  He  was  sentenced  to  be  executed,  but  asked  for  per- 
petual imprisonment,  banishment  or  slavery  instead.     The  request  was  not  granted. 

Feb.  1768.  The  town  voted  to  give  the  French  family  in  this  town,  in  order  to 
transport  them  into  the  northward  country,  not  exceeding  ten  pounds,  including 
charitable  contributions,  to  be  paid  in  provisions. 

At  the  same  meeting,  voted  that  Obadiah  Scott  should  have  liberty  to  live  in 
this  town. 

Dec.  7,  1771.  Moses  Paul,  a  Mohegan,  while  at  the  house  of  Mr.  Clark  in  Beth- 
any, (then  New  Haven,)  and  under  the  influence  of  liquor,  seized  a  flat  iron 
weighing  4|  lbs.,  (Paul  said  "a  stick  or  clubb,")  and  while  aiming,  it  is  alledged, 
at  Mr.  Clark,  missed  him,  and  the  blow  fell  upon  Moses  Cook  of  Waterbury,  who 
was  standing  by.  The  wound  terminated  fatally  Dec.  12.  The  Indian  was  tried  in 
February,  and  sentenced  to  be  hanged  June  17  ;  but  the  General  Assembly,  on  pe- 
tition, postponed  the  execution  till  Sep.  17,  1772.  Sampson  Cecum,  at  the  request 
of  Paul,  preached  the  funeral  sermon,  which  was  published. 

1783.  Peter  Gilkley  was  sentenced  to  two  years  imprisonment  in  Newgate  and 
forfeiture  of  estate.  The  only  evidence  against  him  was  the  tools  found  in  his 
house.  He  denied  that  he  had  counterfeited,  though  he  confessed  that  he  had  in- 
tended to  do  so.  He  said  that  his  wife  and  children  were  destitute  ;  that  he  was 
wounded  in  the  hand,  the  use  of  which  he  had  lost ;  that  he  was  sick  and  worn 
out,  and  asked  for  a  remission  of  punishment  and  a  restoration  of  his  estate.  He 
was  discharged  from  prison. 

Isaac  Hine  was  charged  with  being  an  accompHce  of  Gilkley  and  arrested,  but 
for  want  of  evidence  was  acquitted. 

Dec.  27,  1784,  at  a  town  meeting,  a  memorial  was  received  from  Isaac  Bronson 
and  others,  asking  liberty  to  erect  a  saw  mill  "on  the  Great  Brook  where  the  old 
one  now  standeth,"  (which  would  accommodate  the  neighborhood  of  Breakneck,) 
and  to  build  a  dam  which  would  cause  the  water  "to  flow  across  the  public  road," 
on  condition  that  they  maintained  a  bridge,  &c.     The  request  was  granted. 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY.  369 

1*785.  John  Porter  and  Elnathan  Jennings  of  Waterbury  were  apprehended 
for  counterfeiting  coin.  They  escaped  twice  and  were  rearrested  and  imprisoned. 
They  then  broke  goal  and  fled. 

Dec.  21,  1*786.  Two  of  the  five  selectmen  were"  to  collect  the  town  rate  and 
provide  for  the  poor,  and  "be  allowed  a  reasonable  reward;"  but  the  other  three 
were  to  "have  no  reward  for  their  service  except  for  hxying  out  highways,  and  a 
dinner  on  such  days  as  they  are  employed  in  the  service  of  the  town." 

Dec.  8,  1*788,  Noah  Cande  asked  for  liberty  of  the  town  to  setup  a  blacksmith's 
shop  for  his  own  use,  "  at  the  west  end  of  a  cider  mill  yard,  a  little  east  of  Col. 
Baklwin's  dwelling  house ,  against  the  southeast  corner  of  Col.  Porter's  pot-ash 
lot." 

Dec.  30,  1789.  On  motion  of  John  Welton,  Esq.,  the  selectmen  were  instruct- 
ed to  purchase  a  piece  of  ground,  in  the  northern  part  of  the  town,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  a  burying  yard,  if  they  thought  proper. 

Sep.  20,  1791,  Doct.  Abel  Bronson  Capt.  Isaac  Bronson,  and  Col.  Phineas 
Porter  were  chosen  a  committee  to  confer  with  Woodbury  and  the  neighboring 
towns  on  the  subject  of  a  new  county  and  to  hear  proposals,  &c.  Another  com- 
mittee was  appointed,  April  9,  1*792,  "to  treat  with  the  neighboring  towns  east- 
ward and  westward  respecting  a  new  county." 

Jan.  27,  1794.  On  petition  of  Mr.  Eli  Bronson  praying  for  a  burying  ground 
for  Middlebury  society,  the  selectmen  were  authorized  to  purchase  ground  for 
that  purpose. 

Jan.  It),  1797,  the  town  directed  the  selectmen  to  pay  the  selectmen  of  Wolcott 
£3,  Ids.  Od.,  lawful  money,  to  be  applied  to  the  payment,  in  part,  of  their  burying 
ground. 

April  22,  1801.  The  selectmen  were  "authorized  to  purchase  so  much  land  as 
they  shall  judge  necessary  for  the  convenience  of  the  public  to  be  improved  as  a 
burying  ground  on  the  east  side  of  and  adjoining  to  the  present  burying  ground,  at 
the  expense  of  the  town,"  and  to  sell  so  much  land  at  the  south  end  of  the  old 
yard  as  they  judged  unsuitable  for  the  purpose  of  a  burying  ground. 

Feb.  21,  1803.  The  town  voted  to  prefer  a  petition  to  the  next  General  As- 
sembly praying  said  Assembly  to  quiet  the  present  possession  of  land  in  the  said 
ancient  town  of  Waterbury,  in  the  full  and  peaceable  enjoyment  of  the  same,  so 
far  as  their  titles  may  be  defective  in  consequence  of  the  usual  custom  of  locat- 
ing lands  within  said  town  without  a  title  to  the  common  lands  by  deed,  with 
which  said  surveys  or  locations  are  filled  up. 

24 


APPENDIX 


I.    BIOGRAPHY.^ 


AMOS   BENEDICT, 

Son  of  the  late  Aaron  Benedict  of  Middlebury,  and  an  elder  brother 
of  Aaron  Benedict  of  Waterbury,  was  born  July  6,  1780.  He  was 
graduated  at  Yale  College  in  1800;  studied  law  at  the  Law  School  in 
Litchfield  ;  married  a  daughter  of  Capt.  Stone  of  that  place,  and  settled 
in  Watertown,  Jefferson  County,  N.  Y.,  in  180Y,  where  he  soon  became 
a  leading  member  of  the  bar.  He  was  the  second  district  attorney, 
being  first  appointed  in  1810,  and  again  in  1813  and  1814.f  The 
district  then  comprised  the  counties  of  Jefferson,  Lewis  and  St.  Law- 
rence. In  1816,  he  returned  to  Connecticut,  visited  his  friends  in  Litch- 
field, was  taken  ill,  and  after  a  week's  confinenient,  died  of  "a  car- 
buncle on  the  back."     He  was  buried  in  Litchfield. 

ISAAC  BRONSOX, 

The  son  of  Isaac  and  Mary  (Brocket)  Bronson,  was  born  at  Break- 
neck, now  Middlebury,  March  10,  1700.  His  father,  grandfather, 
great  grandfather  and  great,  great  grandfather,  (the  original  plant- 
er,) all  bore  the  name  of  Isaac,  and  all  except  the  last,  were  eldest 
sons. 

The  subject  of  this  notice  was  extensively  known  for  his  intimate 
acquaintance  with  the  principles  of  banking,  currency  and  finance.  His 
father  was  a  farmer  of  bighly  respectable  character,  and  often  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Legislature.     A  small  farm  was  his  chief  source  of  revenue, 

*  Several  of  the  biographical  notices  in  the  following  pages  have  been  furnished,  wholly  or 
in  part,  by  others.  For  those  of  Isaac  Bronson,  Reuben  Holmes,  Samuel  L.  Hopkins  and  Marli 
Leavenworth,  I  am  indebted  to  friends  who  have  taken  a  special  interest  in  this  work. 

t  See  Dr.  Hough's  History  of  Jefferson  County. 


APPENDIX.  3T1 

and  to  support  the  expenses  of  bis  family  required  all  his  industry  and 
economy.  For  this  reason,  neither  of  his  sons  received  a  collegiate 
education,  but  they  had  the  best  advantages  which  his  limited  means 
would  afford.  There  are  few  country  places  where  intellectual  culture 
was  more  highly  prized  than  in  Middlebury.  The  people  were  conside- 
rate, industrious  and  moral,  and  united  their  efforts  to  provide  means 
for  the  general  diffusion  of  knowledge  among  themselves.  The  influ- 
ence of  such  a  community  was  favorable  to  the  development  of  the 
talents  and  virtues  of  Mr.  Bronson,  and  had  a  salutary  effect  in  form- 
ing his  character.  Few  persons  of  regular  education  were  more  familiar 
with  the  history  of  the  world,  and  with  those  branches  of  information 
which  constitute  useful  and  practical  knowledge. 

While  a  youth,  Mr.  Bronson  pursued  the  study  of  medicine  with  the 
late  Dr.  Lemuel  Hopkins  of  Hartford,  and  entered  the  army  as  a  junior 
surgeon  in  the  Ilevolutionary  war,  on  the  14th  of  November,  1779,  in 
the  2d  regiment  of  light  dragoons,  commanded  by  Col.  Elisha  Sheldon, 
in  the  Connecticut  line,  under  the  immediate  command  of  General 
Washington.  He  continued  constantly  in  the  discharge,  not  only  of 
the  duties  of  that  office,  but  he  also  acted  as  the  senior  surgeon  until 
the  end  of  the  war.  The  senior  officer  was,  from  his  age  and  infirmi- 
ties, unable  to  endure  the  hardships  incident  to  the  peculiar  service  re- 
quired of  that  regiment — the  protection  of  the  inhabitants  of  the  coun- 
try lying  between  the  outposts  of  the  two  contending  armies,  unprotect- 
ed by  the  civil  or  military  power  of  either,  and  exposed  to  the  perpet- 
ual incursions  of  the  enemy.  This  service  required  the  troops  to  be 
constantly  moving,  as  well  for  the  protection  of  the  inhabitants,  as  to 
guard  against  surprise,  which  a  stationary  position  of  twenty-four  hours 
would  at  all  times  have  exposed  them  to.  Not  a  single  tent  belonged 
to  the  regiment,  nor  had  they  any  other  covering  except  the  occasional 
shelter  which  uninhabited  houses  and  barns  afforded.  These  privations 
of  course  exposed  the  troops  to  unusual  hardship.  The  wounded,  as 
well  as  the  sick,  were  frequently  left  under  the  protection  of  flags  of 
truce,  attended  by  the  surgeon  only  ;  the  New  York  levies  being  with- 
out any  medical  officers  even  in  name.  Mr.  Bronson,  though  a  junior 
surgeon,  performed  all  the  medical  duties  for  several  campaigns  for 
all  the  troops  attached  to  Sheldon's  command. 

At  the  close  of  the  war,  Mr.  Bronson  abandoned  the  profession  of 
medicine,  made  a  voyage  to  India,  traveled  in  Europe,  returned 
about  1789  and  married.  About  the  year  1792,  he  settled  with  his 
family  in  Philadelphia  ;  but  after  two  years  residence  in  that  city,  remov- 
ed to  New  York,  where  he  continued  the  business  of  a  banker,  which 


373  HISTOKY   OF   WATEKBURT. 

had  been  commenced  some  time  before,  in  connection  with  Mr.  Fowler 
of  New  York  and  Mr.  Pomeroy  of  Hartford.  In  1796,  he  purchased 
the  property  of  the  late  President  Dwight  on  Greenfield  Hill,  in  this 
State,  for  a  summer  residence,  to  which  place  he  retired  during  a  large 
portion  of  each  year. 

Mr.  Bronson  was  distinguished  for  his  great  intellectual  power,  a 
moral  courage  that  nothing  could  intimidate,  untiring  industry  and  the 
most  scrupulous  integrity.  Upon  any  subject  to  which  his  attention 
was  at  any  time  directed,  his  views  were  clear  and  profound,  and  on  all 
proper  occasions,  expressed  with  great  frankness  and  freedom. 

Having  closed  his  partnership  firm,  he  engaged  in  the  banking  busi. 
ness  in  Bridgeport,  Conn.  He  possessed  the  controlling  influence  in  a 
bank  in  that  place,  and  managed  its  aiiairs  for  more  than  thirty  years. 
His  bank  was  opened  on  the  21st  day  of  May,  1807,  and  a  rule  was 
established  on  that  day  of  the  following  import. — "No  paper,  off"ered  at 
this  Bank  for  discount,  will  be  accepted  having  more  than  60  days  to 
run  to  maturity,  and  every  note  or  bill  discounted  must  be  paid  at  ma- 
turity. No  renewal  or  new  discount  will  be  made  in  substitution  for  or 
in  aid  of  the  payment  of  an  existing  indebtedness."  There  was  no 
set  form  of  by-laws  enacted.  This  simple,  searching  and  effective  rule 
was  the  solitary  but  inflexible  law  for  the  government  of  the  institution. 
In  the  outset,  some  of  its  debtors,  regarding  a  bank  in  the  light  of  a 
benevolent  institution,  possessing  recognized  and  special  privileges,  and 
therefore  bound  to  accommodate  the  public,  (a  heresy  alike  fjital  to  the 
country  and  the  banks,)  denounced  the  rule  as  arbitrary  and  unaccom- 
modating. It  however  was  invariably  enforced,  and  its  requirements 
obeyed.  It  induced  and  compelled  debtors  to  carry  out  the  same  con- 
servative principle  in  all  their  private  transactions.  Each  trader  con- 
ducted his  business,  not  on  borrowed  bank  credit,  but  on  his  own  capi- 
tal, and  thus  brought  the  amount  of  his  transactions  within  his  own 
means — short  credits  and  quick  returns  were  characteristic  of  the  trans- 
actions of  the  customers  of  the  bank.  The  gains  of  the  people,  the 
fruit  of  honest  and  patient  industry  and  well  considered  economy,  were 
not  sudden  and  spasmodic,  but  sure  and  steady.  The  bank,  in  short, 
only  cashed  sales,  and  it  was  soon  proved,  after  the  bank  was  fairly  in 
operation,  that  its  ability  to  discount  had  no  sort  of  connection  with  or 
dependence  on  the  amount  of  the  capital,  and  that  the  latter  was  of  no 
use  except  to  inspire  confidence.  A  currency  fully  equal  to  the  de- 
mands of  trade  was  sustained,  and  more  could  not  have  been  sustained, 
however  large  its  capital.  Its  circulating  notes  were  issued  only  in  ex- 
change for  business  paper,   representing  commodities  in  transitu,  and 


APPENDIX.  STB 

were,  as  has  alrealy  been  observed,  practically  secured  by  a  Hen  on 
those  commodities.  Ouce  in  every  60  days  the  whole  debt  due  the 
bank  was  canceled  by  payment.  There  was  no  attempt  by  the  bank 
to  regulate  trade  or  exchanges,  but  it  was  itself  regulated  by  them.  It 
WHS  the  servant  of  trade,  not  its  master.  Its  circulation  vibrated 
largely.  At  certain  seasons,  when  the  products  of  the  country  were 
coming  forward  to  market,  it  expanded ;  at  others  it  shrunk  within  very 
narrow  limits,  as  the  records  of  the  bank  will  show. 

The  foregoing  is  a  brief  sketch  of  the  principles  of  banking  employ- 
ed by  Mr.  Bronson,  and  the  result  bears  ample  evidence  of  their  sound- 
ness and  safety.  The  bank  maintained  its  credit  and  solvency  through 
the  war  of  1812  and  two  financial  crises,  during  which  all  the  banks 
of  the  country  suspended  specie  payment ;  and  at  no  time  in  that  long 
interval,  and  during  the  severe  financial  difficulties  that  disturbed  and 
embarrassed  the  commercial  world,  did  its  notes  or  obligations  ever  fall 
below  the  specie  standard. 

Mr.  Bronson  carried  out  the  principles  which  have  been  ex])lained 
and  exerted  his  intiuence  to  secure  their  general  adoption.  Ilis  courage 
and  greatest,  energy  were  put  to  a  severe  test.  lie  had  engaged  against 
him  the  wealth  and  influence  of  the  mercantile  classes,  sustained  by 
most  of  the  legal  talent  of  the  city  of  New  York,  when  he,  at  two  im- 
portant commercial  crises,  persisted  in  his  efibrts,  and  succeeded  by 
legal  proceedings,  in  compelling  the  banks  of  that  city  to  contract  their 
circulation,  and  finally  to  resume  specie  payments.  Ilis  discernment  in 
whatever  related  to  political  economy  has  seldom  been  equaled.  He 
would  foretell  the  efiects  of  a  given  measure  upon  the  general  system 
of  trade,  with  all  the  precision  of  past  events.  The  fulfillment  of  his 
predictions,  in  regard  to  the  result  of  many  momentous  steps  taken  by 
the  banks  or  the  government,  seemed  almost  to  indicate  the  supernatu- 
ral gift  of  prophesy.  No  political  bias,  or  regard  for  public  opinion, 
or  sinister  motive  connected  with  his  own  interests,  ever  seemed  to  in- 
fluence his  judgment.  In  all  his  opinions  and  actions,  he  was  swayed 
by  truth  and  rectitude.  Hamilton  and  other  distinguished  men  con- 
nected with  the  federal  government,  in  its  early  annals,  confided  in  his 
talents  and  virtues,  and  often  consulted  him,  with  great  deference  for 
his  opinions,  especially  in  regard  to  financial  questions.  His  wealth 
acquired  in  the  pursuit  of  his  business,  was  the  result  of  his  financial 
wisdom. 

His  liberality  was  great  but  unostentatious,  and  whenever  he  confer- 
red a  favor,  he  endeavored  to  conceal  it  from  the  world.  In  his  own 
family,  he  was  beloved  for  all  that  could   endear  a  husband  and  father. 


5ci  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUKY. 

For  thirty  years  prior  to  his  death,  he  devoted  much  attention  to  the 
Christian  religion,  and  never  for  a  moment  was  shaken  in  his  clear  con- 
viction of  the  great  truths  of  the  Bible.  He  lived  and  died  with  a  firm 
reliance  on  its  promises.  His  great  age  cast  no  shadow  over  his  men- 
tal powers,  which  continued  in  their  full  force  and  brilliancy  to  the  close 
of  life. 

After  his  return  from  India  and  Europe,  Mr.  Bronson  married  Anna, 
daughter  of  Thomas  Olcott  of  Stratford.  By  this  marriage,  he  had 
ten  children.  1.  Oliver;  died  in  infimcy.  2.  Maria;  died  in  infancy. 
3.  Maria;  born  Aug.  18,  1793,  in  New  York  city ;  married,  Dec.  27, 
1814,  Col.  James  B.  Murray  of  New  York  city;  had  seven  children, 
and  died  Dec.  21,1851.  4.  Harriet;  born  Jan.  14, 1798,  in  New  York 
city,  and  died,  unmarried,  in  November,  1835,  in  Switzerland.  5.  Car- 
oline; born  Jan.  14,  1798,  in  New  York  city;  married  Doctor  Marinus 
Willet  of  New  York,  son  of  Col.  Marinus  Willet,  and  died  of  consump- 
tion, March  1,  1853,  leaving  six  children.  6.  Oliver;  born  Oct.  3,  1799, 
at  Greenfield,  Conn. ;  married  Joanna  Donaldson  and  has  four  children. 
7.  Arthur  ;  born  Jan.  14,  1801,  in  New  York  city  ;  married  Anna  Eliza, 
daughter  of  Gen.  Theodorus  Bailey  of  New  York,  Nov.  20,  1823 ; 
died  of  pneumonia,  Nov.  19,  1844,  leaving  three  children.  8.  Frederic; 
born  May  2,  1802,  in  New  York  city ;  married,  March  1, 1838,  Charlotte 
Brinckerhoff  of  New  York,  and  has  three  children.  9.  Mary ;  born 
Aug.  2,  1806,  at  Greenfield;  unmarried.  10.  Ann;  born  March  25, 
1810,  at  Greenfield;  died  July  19,  1840,  unmarried. 

Isaac  Bronson  died  of  a  neuralgic  affection  of  the  heart,  at  Greenfield 
Hill,  May  19,  1839.  His  widow  died,  at  the  same  place.  May  17,  1850, 
in  the  86th  year  of  her  age. 

ETHEL   BRONSON, 

A  younger  brother  of  Dr.  Isaac  Bronson,  was  born  in  that  part  of 
"\Vaterbury  which  is  now  Middlebury,  July  22d,  1765,  and  married  Dec. 
30,  1787,  Hepzibah,  daughter  of  Joseph  Hopkins,  Esq.  He  became  a 
prominent  citizen  of  his  native  town,  was  a  justice  of  the  peace,  and  a 
member  of  the  Legislature  for  six  sessions. 

In  May,  1804,  he  removed  to  Jefferson  County,  N.  Y.,  and  became 
the  agent  of  his  brother  Isaac  for  the  sale  of  lands.  He  went  with  his 
family  in  company  with  David  Tyler  and  Josiah  Tyler.  The  journey 
occupied  three  weeks,  over  roads  barely  passable  with  teams,  and  through 
uninhabited  forests.  The  party  were  obliged  to  walk  much  of  the  dis- 
tance, to  encamp  in  their  wagons,  and  to  subsist,  in  good  part,  on  wild 


APPENDIX.  375 

game.     They  settled  in  Rutland,  near  Watertown,  Bronson  in  tlie  center 
of  the  town. 

Ethel  Bronson  was  one  of  the  leading  men  of  Jefferson  County.  He 
was  three  times  elected  to  the  Legislature,  and  in  1813  was  judge  of 
the  County  Court.  At  the  time  of  his  death,  in  1825,  he  was  president 
of  the  Jefferson  County  Bank.  "He  was  not  ambitious  for  public 
office ;  but  in  those  qualities  that  make  a  good  citizen,  a  kind  neighbor 
and  a  valued  friend,  he  was  preeminent.  He  was  kind  and  liberal  al- 
most to  a  fault ;  yet  public  spirited,  and  enterprising,  and  possessing  a 
character  marked  with  integrity  and  probity.  He  was  beloved  by  his 
friends,  and  respected  by  all  who  knew  him."* 


ISAAC  H.  BROXSOX, 

Son  of  Ethel  Bronson,  was  born  in  "Waterbury,  parish  of  Middle- 
bury,  probably  in  1802.  An  obituary  notice,  published  in  the  New 
York  Journal  of  Commerce,  Aug.  29,  1855,  says  that  he  was  born  in 
Rutland,  Jefferson  Co.,  Oct.  16,  1802.  At  this  period,  his  father  had 
not  removed  from  Middlebury.  The  American  Almanac,  for  1856, 
gives  his  age  at  the  time  of  his  death,  in  1855,  as  48.  He  must  have 
been  several  years  older. 

Mr.  Bronson,  according  to  the  Journal  of  Commerce,  was  admitted 
to  the  bar  in  1822.  He  rose  rapidly  to  eminence,  as  a  lawyer,  in  Jeffer- 
son County.  He  was  elected  to  the  twenty-fifth  Congress,  in  1836,  and 
was  a  candidate,  in  1838,  for  the  next  Congress,  but  was  defeated.  In 
the  last  named  year,  he  was  appointed  Circuit  Judge,  but  being  in  deli- 
cate health,  he  declined  to  serve,  and  retired  to  private  life. 

In  1840,  Mr.  Bronson  was  appointed  United  States  Judge  for  the 
Eastern  District  of  Florida,  and  retained  the  office  till  1845,  when  Flor- 
ida became  a  State.  His  residence  during  this  period,  and  afterwards, 
while  United  States  Judge,  is  set  down  as  St.  Augustine.  At  the  first 
session  of  the  Legislature  of  the  new  State,  he  was  chosen  unanimously 
Circuit  Judge  of  the  Eastern  Circuit  of  Florida.  Soon  after,  he  was 
appointed  United  States  District  Judge  of  the  State  ;  and  a  year  later, 
when  the  State  was  divided,  he  retained  the  Northern  District,  and  was 
continued  in  office  till  his  decease.  He  died  at  his  residence.  Sunny 
Point,  Palatka,  (a  few  miles  from  St.  Augustine,)  Fla.,  Aug.  13,  1855. 

Mr.  Bronson  is  described  as  a  most  able  judge — a  man  of  high  moral 
principle,  of   liberal  and  patriotic   views,  of  energy,   sagacity  and  busi- 

*  Hough's  History  of  Jefferson  County,  N.  Y. 


370  HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKT. 

ness  capacity.  For  fifteen  years  liis  name  was  identified  ^Yitli  the  his- 
tory and  prosperity  of  Florida. 

TILLOTSON  13R0NS0X,  D.  D., 

The  fourth  in  descent  from  Isaac  Bronson,  the  original  planter  of  Wa- 
terbury,  was  the  sixth  child  and  eldest  son  of  Capt.  Amos  and  Anna 
(Blakeslee)  Bronson,  and  was  born  at  a  place  called  Jerico,  on  the  Naug- 
atuck  River,  in  Northbury,  Jan.  8,  1762.  His  father  was  one  of  the 
leading  men  of  the  Episcopal  society  of  the  place.  Being  a  regular 
attendant  at  church,  and  living  at  some  distance,  he  was  accustomed, 
on  Sunday  morning,  to  provide  himself  as  follows  : — Taking  a  common 
brown  corn  bag,  he  would  put  the  dinner  in  one  end  and  a  wooden  bot- 
tle of  cider  in  the  other.  Placing  this  across  the  saddle,  he  mounted 
the  horse,  took  his  wife  behind  him  on  a  pillion,  placed  "  Tilly,"  or  some 
of  the  other  children,  before,  and  thus  equipped  for  the  day,  rode  to 
church.  This  was  the  common  method  of  traveling  in  those  days. 
Sometimes  a  second  child  would  be  taken  in  the  lap  of  the  mother. 
Occasionally,  still  another,  it  is  stated,  was  added  to  the  load  ;  but  I 
know  not  where  it  could  have  been  placed,  unless  in  the  bag  to  balance 
the  oats  which  were  sometimes  carried.  A  horse  fully  freighted  in  this 
way,  with  provision,  live  stock  and  cider,  was  said  to  carry  a  "  Judd 
load,"  after  some  of  the  Jiidds  who  were  remarkable  for  these  demon- 
strations. 

Capt.  Bronson  was  a  respectable  farmer,  and  very  naturally  desired 
that  his  eldest  son,  who  could  be  of  most  assistance  to  him,  should  fol- 
low his  own  occupation.  The  son  acceded  to  the  wishes  of  the  father,  and 
labored  upon  the  farm  ;  but  his  heart  and  mind  were  somewhere  else. 
Refraining  wholly  from  amusements,  it  is  stated  that  he  spent  all  his 
leisure  hours  in  the  perusal  of  the  few  books  which  he  could  command. 
His  mother  encouraged  him  in  his  studies,  and  desired  he  should  have 
the  benefit  of  a  public  education.  But  the  father  was  still  averse  to 
gratifying  these  inclinations,  thinking  perhaps  he  could  ill  aSbrd  the  ex- 
pense. But  the  mother  persevered,  and  the  result  was  Tilly,  at  the  age 
of  eighteen,  was  put  under  the  care  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Trumbull  of  West- 
bury  to  study  Latin  and  Greek,  and  prepare  for  college.  He  afterwards 
taught  school  in  Waterbury,  in  order  to  aid  in  defraying  the  expenses 
of  his  education.  "While  a  member  of  Yale  College,  his  mother,  persever- 
ing in  her  purpose,  made  great  exertions  for  his  support.  She  spun,  and 
wove,  and  carded  wool.  Often  she  rode  into  New  Haven  on  horseback, 
carrying  the  rolls  (of  wool)  which  she  had  prepared,  behind  her,  with 


APPENDIX.  STY 

wliicli  she  paid  her  son's  quarter  bills.  He  assisted  by  keepinrj  school ; 
the  last  year  of  his  college  course,  in  New  Milford.  He  graduated  in 
1786,  having  for  classmates,  Stanley  Griswold,  Frederick  Wolcott,  John 
Kingsbury,  (afterwards  of  Waterbury,)  &c.  Little  is  known  of  his 
scholarship  at  this  time,  except  that  he  was  a  laborious  student.  Imme- 
diately after  graduation,  he  was  admitted  as  a  candidate  for  holy  orders.* 
He  prosecuted,  for  a  time,  his  theological  studies  under  the  direction  of 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Mansfield,  but  completed  them  under  the  immediate  super- 
intendence of  Bishop  Seabury.  By  the  latter,  he  was  ordained  as  dea- 
con, Sept.  11,  1787,  and  priest,  Feb.  24, 1788. 

In  the  first  year  of  his  ministry,  Mr.  Bronson  officiated  in  the  churches 
at  Stratford,  Vt.,  and  Hanover,  N.  H.  Afterwards,  he  went  to  Boston  and 
supplied  the  place  of  Rev.  Mr.  Montague,  Rector  of  Christ's  Church, 
during  a  temporary  absence.  At  a  later  period,  he  officiated  in  Hebron, 
Chatham  and  Middle  Haddara,  in  this  State.  In  1795,  by  invitation  of 
the  Episcopal  Convention,  he  opened  a  school  in  Cheshire,  which  was 
designed  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  Academy  in  that  place.  In  Decem- 
ber, 1797,  he  accepted  an  invitation  from  the  Episcopal  society  of  "Wa- 
terbury, and  became  its  first  settled  pastor  after  the  completion  of  the 
new  church.  Here  he  labored  three-fourths  of  the  time,  for  which  he 
received  §250  per  annum.  The  remaining  fourth,  he  preached  in  Salem. 
He  resided  in  the  old  "  Barlow  house,"  the  house  next  east  of  Almon 
Farrel's,  on  Grand  street.  His  parochial  duties  were  discharged  with 
faithfulness,  ability  and  success.  The  parish  prospered  under  his  teach- 
ings, and  a  strong  affection  grew  up  between  minister  and  people.  He 
was  wont  to  recur,  in  after  life,  to  the  period  he  spent  in  Waterbury,  in 
charge  of  St.  John's  church,  as  the  happiest  and  most  satisfVictory  of  his 
life.  At  last,  however,  the  inadequateness  of  his  salary,  and  the  unwill- 
ingness or  inability  of  his  people  to  raise  it,  compelled  him  to  seek  a 
new  situation.     He  preached  his  farewell  sermon  in  June,  180G. 

From  Waterbury,  Mr.  Bronson  removed  to  New  Haven,  and  became 
the  editor  of  ihe  Churchman's  Magazine.  Soon  after,  in  the  same  year, 
he  was  appointed,  by  the  Episcopal  Convention,  principal  of  the  Acade- 
my in  Cheshire,  where  he  took  up  his  residence.  He  continued,  how- 
ever, in  the  management  of  the  Magazine,  arranging  the  papers,  and 
furnishing  much  of  the  matter,  editorially  and  in  the  way  of  commu- 
nications. The  interesting  sketch  of  the  history  of  the  church  in  Wa- 
terbury, of  which  I  have  made  a  liberal  use  on  a  previous  occasion,  ap- 

*  See  Rev.  Dr.  Beardsley's  Historical  Address,  giving  an  account  of  the  Episcopal  Academy 
in  Cheshire — also,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Noble's  Memoir  of  Dr.  Bronson  in  the  Churchman's  Magazine, 
Vol.  v.    To  both  of  these  sources,  I  am  indebted  for  facts  contained  in  this  sketch. 


378  inSTOKY  OF  wateeburt. 

pears  to  have  been  furnished  by  him.  After  two  or  three  years,  the 
phice  of  publication  of  the  periodical  was  removed  to  New  York,  and 
Mr.  Bronson's  connection  with  it  ceased.  At  a  subsequent  period,  he 
once  more  became  the  editor,  the  work  having,  in  the  mean  time,  been 
discontinued  and  again  revived.  He  was  acting  in  this  capacity  when 
fatal  disease  overtook  him.  The  volumes  which  were  published  under 
his  supervision,  are  regarded  as  the  ablest  and  most  valuable  of  the 
whole,  and  creditable  to  American  literature. 

About  the  time  Mr.  Bronson  was  appointed  principal  of  the  Acad- 
emy, he  was  chosen  a  member  of  the  Connecticut  Academy  of  Arts 
and  Sciences.  In  1813,  he  received  from  Brown  University  the  degree 
of  Doctor  of  Divinity.  Ills  intiuence  in  the  councils  of  the  Diocese  was 
uniformly  great,  and  for  twenty  years  he  was  chosen  by  the  Convention 
their  standing  committee.  He  held  other  offices  of  honor  and  responsi- 
bility, all  of  which  his  broken  health  compelled  him  to  resign  or  de- 
cline in  June,  1820.  At  this  time,  an  affecting  letter  was  addressed  by 
him  to  the  Convention,  in  session  at  Newtown,  from  which  the  following 
is  an  extract.     I  give  also  some  remarks  by  Dr.  Beardsley. 

Xext  October  will  complete  forty  years  that  I  have  been  in  the  ministry.  Dur- 
ing the  whole  of  which  time,  I  have  been  blessed  with  such  a  measure  of  health 
as  never  to  have  been  absent  from  Convention  through  bodily  indisposition  ;  rarely 
from  any  other  cause  ;  and  never  more  than  on  three  or  four  occasions,  from  the 
public  service  of  the  Church,  until  within  a  few  weeks  past.  At  this  time,  there 
is  but  one  clergyman  in  these  states,  whose  letters  of  orders,  from  the  American 
Episcopate,  are  dated  earlier  than  mine.  During  twenty  years  past,  just  one  half 
of  my  clerical  Hfe,  I  have  been  honored  with  the  confidence  of  the  Convention  in 
their  choice  of  standing  committee.  It  is  thus  full  time  I  should  wish  to  retire  from 
the  trust.  To  thi^  I  am  loudly  admonished  by  increasing  years,  and  more  by  a  bodily  ' 
infirmity  which  threatens  to  render  me  incapable  of  discharging  the  incumbent 
duty.  It  is  therefore  my  earnest  desire  no  longer  to  be  considered  as  a  candidate 
for  any  appointment  in  the  gift  of  the  Convention.  "With  all  proper  sentiments  of 
respect  and  gratitude  for  the  past,  I  beg  the  acceptance  of  my  best  wishes  and 
prayers  for  the  harmony,  peace  and  prosperity  of  the  Church  and  Diocese,  in 
which  I  have  so  long  ministered. 

As  a  scholar,  [says  the  Rev.  Dr.  Beardsley,]  his  reputation  was  deservedly 
high.  He  was  profound  and  correct,  without  being  brilliant  or  polished.  His 
love  of  the  classics  increased  with  his  years,  and  the  glow  of  enthusiasm  into 
which  he  would  kindle  while  commenting  on  beautiful  passages  Jn  Homer  and 
Virgil,  often  transported  him,  like  Priam's  zeal  for  fallen  Troy,  beyond  the  neces- 
sities of  the  occasion.  But  his  favorite  studies  were  mathematics  and  natural 
philosophy  ;  and  to  these  he  would  devote  himself  for  hours,  unconscious  of  ex- 
ternal things  and  unmindful  of  his  bodily  comfort.  [He  delivered  to  the  pupils  of 
the  Academy  of  which  he  had  charge  till  the  close  of  life]  a  series  of  lectures  on 
the  rise  and  progress  of  the  manual  arts,  which,  begun  at  an  early  period  of  his 
labors  as  an  instructor,  were  perfected  as  the  advancement  of  science  and  his  own 


HISTOEY   OF   WATEKBURT.  3T9 

researches  furnished  materials.  Detached  parts  of  these  lectures  appeared  in  the 
Churchman's  Magazine  ;  and  so  highly  were  they  esteemed  by  his  pupils,  that  the 
project  was  once  suggested  of  securing  the  publication  of  the  whole  series. 

He  wrote  and  published,  in  bis  magazine,  several  short  pieces  of 
poetry.  One,  entitled  the  "Retrospect,"  (Vol.  V,  p.  158,)  describes  the 
wild  scenery  which  surrounded  his  youthful  home  on  the  Naugatuck  ; 
and  if  it  does  not  reach  the  highest  standard  of  excellence,  it  is  supe- 
rior to  much  that  goes  by  the  name  of  poetry. 

Dr.  Bronson  was  not  an  orator.  He  did  not  study  the  graces  of  elo- 
cution. Still,  his  sermons  were  always  good.  Their  characteristics  were 
clearness  and  fulness.  As  a  teacher,  he  acquired  a  wide  reputation ; 
and  the  Academy  of  which  he  was  the  head,  a  degree  of  respectability 
which  had  then  been  obtained  by  few  similar  institutions.  The  number 
of  students  ranged,  for  a  long  period,  from  eighty  to  one  hundred,  a 
great  proportion  of  whom  were  preparing  for  college,  or  pursuing  a  pro- 
fessional course  of  theology. 

The  subject  of  this  notice  was  distinguished  for  modesty,  simplicity, 
sincerity.  He  was  mild,  amiable  and  indulgent,  and  is  charged  with 
being  lax  in  discipline.  At  the  same  time,  he  is  described  as  inflexible 
in  principle.  After  having  suff"ered  several  months  from  stone  in  the 
bladder,  he  had  repeated  paralytic  attacks,  and  died  Sept.  6,  1826,  in 
the  65th  year  of  his  age. 

BENXET  BRONSOX 

Was  the  youngest  son  of  Dea.  Stephen  Bronson,  a  thrifty  farmer,  and 
was  born  on  the  old  Isaac  Bronson  jilace,  Nov.  14,  1775.  In  childhood, 
he  worked  upon  the  farm  in  the  summer,  and  attended  a  district  school 
in  the  winter.  In  1786,  he  went  to  the  town  Academy,  then  recently 
opened,  having  for  a  schoolmate  Jeremiah  Day,  afterwards  president  of 
Yale  College.  From  an  early  period,  his  father  had  intended  he  should 
go  to  college  ;  but  at  the  age  of  twelve  years  he  had  a  long  course  of 
sickness,  from  which  he  did  not  recover  till  after  the  death  of  his  eldest 
brother,  Jesse.  Being  now  an  only  son,  his  father  wanted  his  assistance 
on  the  farm,  but  at  length  concluded  to  put  him  upon  a  course  of 
study.  With  this  object,  he  was  sent  to  Cheshire,  at  the  age  of  fifteen, 
to  study  with  the  Rev.  John  Foot,  the  Congregational  minister,  in 
whose  family  he  resided.  After  six  months,  he  returned  home,  and  al- 
ternately labored  on  the  farm  and  studied,  till  May,  1 793.  He  then 
went  back  to  Mr.  Foot's,  completed  his  preparatory  studies,  and  entered 
Yale  College.      In  1797,  he  graduated,  having  for  classmates,  Lyman 


380  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

Beeclier,  Thomns  Day,  Samuel  A.  Foot,  James  Murdock,  Horatio  Sey- 
mour, Seth  P.  Staples,  and  other  distinguished  men. 

The  first  year  after  leaving  College,  Mr.  Bronson  spent  in  teaching 
school  and  working  his  Other's  farm.  In  September,  1798,  he  engaged 
in  a  school  at  Derby  Landing ;  but  before  the  end  of  the  first  quarter 
received  the  appointment  of  first  lieutenant  in  the  provisional  army  of 
the  United  States.  He  finished  the  quarter,  and  entered  on  the  recruit- 
ing service  in  May,  1*799.  In  August  following,  he  joined  his  regi- 
ment at  New  Haven  under  Col.  Timothy  Taylor.  In  October,  the  regi- 
ment was  ordered  to  New  Jersey ;  but  the  packet  at  Hurl  Gate  ran 
upon  sunken  rocks  and  filled.  Small  boats  came  and  rescued  the  pas- 
sengers, who  were  in  great  peril.  They  were  quartered  in  New  Jersey 
with  two  other  regiments,  at  a  place  called  Scotch  Plains,  for  the  winter. 
The  three  (11th,  12th  and  13th)  were  commanded  by  Col.  Smith  of 
New  York.  But  "John  Adams'  war"  was  a  short  one.  The  army  was 
disbanded  by  act  of  Congress,  in  1800,  and  Lieut.  Bronson  doffed  his 
epaulets  and  returned  to  Waterbury. 

The  next  week  after  his  return,  Mr.  B.  commenced  the  study  of  law 
under  the  Hon.  Noah  B.  Benedict  of  "Woodbury.  In  April,  1802,  he 
was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  Litchfield  County,  and  the  next  summer 
opened  an  oflice  in  his  native  town. 

In  May,  1809,  Mr.  Bronson  was  appointed  a  justice  of  the  peace,  and 
was  reappointed  'annually  till  1818.  In  May,  1827,  be  was  again  se- 
lected for  that  ofiice,  and  held  it  for  three  successive  years.  After- 
wards, he  refused  to  serve.  In  May,  1812,  he  was  made  one  of  the  as- 
sistant judges  of  the  New  Haven  County  Court,  and  was  continued  in 
ofiice  two  years.  In  1824,  he  became  chief  judge  of  the  same  court 
and  held  the  ofiice  six  years,  when  a  change  of  political  parties  caused 
his  removal.  Once  only,  in  May,  1829,  he  represented  the  town  in  the 
Legislature. 

In  the  spring  of  1814,  Mr.  Bronson  became  interested,  for  the  first 
time,  in  the  manufacturing  business.  He  connected  himself,  for  one 
year,  with  the  late  Mark  Leavenworth.  They  made,  with  a  good  profit, 
five  thousand  wooden  clocks.  In  the  spring  of  1823,  he  became  a  lim- 
ited partner,  in  the  company  of  "  A.  Benedict,"  for  the  manufacture  of 
brass  and  gilt  buttons.  Of  the  ^6,500  capital,  he  took  82,000,  and  his 
friends  in  New  Haven,  Nathan  Smith,  William  Bristol  and  David  C 
De  Forest,  3,000.  He  besides  lent  the  company  money  and  supplied  it, 
to  a  limited  extent,  with  credit.  Though  not,  at  that  time,  a  man  of 
large  means,  he  was  better  known  for  his  pecuniary  reliability  than  any 
man  in  his   neighborhood.     Thus   the   company  started  with   a  good 


APPENDIX.  381 

credit,  which,  under  the  skillful  management  of  the  general  partner,  it 
ever  afterwards  maintained.  His  interest  in  the  business,  carried  on  un- 
der various  names  and  organizations,  continued  till  his  decease. 

"When  the  Waterbury  Bank  was  organized  in  1848,  Mr.  B.  was  one 
of  its  most  influential  friends.  Its  stock  was  taken  up  with  the  under- 
standing that  he  was  to  be  its  chief  officer.  He  subscribed  largely  him- 
self, and  was  the  president  till  his  death. 

From  an  early  period,  the  subject  of  this  notice  was  an  extensive  land 
owner.  Indeed,  farming  was  the  only  business,  except  his  profession,  to 
which  he  gave  his  personal  attention.  He  soon  discovered,  or  rather  re- 
discovered, the  superior  value'  of  the  river  over  the  hill  lands,  and  their 
greater  susceptibility  of  improvement  by  good  husbandry.  While  the  lat- 
ter would  yield  say  three  or  four  per  cent,  on  the  buying  price,  tlie  former 
might  be  readily  made  to  pay  seven  or  eight.  He  declined,  therefore^ 
to  till  his  uplands,  and  bought  in  the  meadows,  adding  to  his  purchases 
from  year  to  year,  till  he  finally  owned  about  one  hundred  acres  up  and 
down  the  Naugatuck  River.  These  lands  were  near  at  hand  and  easily 
worked.  Manure  could  be  got  upon  them  with  much  less  expense  than 
upon  the  uplands.  His  first  work  was  to  clear  up  the  bushes  which  had 
been  gradually  extending  from  many  points,  and  to  fill  up  the  holes 
with  brush-wood  loaded  with  stones.  He  thus  removed  the  impediments 
to  the  current  of  water  which,  in  flood  time,  had  made  snch  havoc  with 
the  soil.  He  selected  the  more  elevated  and  least  valuable  ground^ 
covered  the  surface  deeply  with  manure,  plowed  and  planted  it  with 
corn,  and  then,  in  the  fall,  sowed  it  with  rye  and  grass  seed.  Thus  he 
obtained  excellent  crops  of  corn,  rye,  oats  and  grass,  and  made  lands 
which  were  nearly  worthless — which  had  lain  neglected  for  a  long  time 
— quite  valuable.  Sometimes  his  plowed  fields  would  get  washed  by 
the  floods,  but  not  often. 

Mr.  Bronson's  professional  business,  though  not  extensive,  was  respect- 
able. He  was  a  good  lawyer,  sound,  discriminating,  and  in  early  and 
middle  life  studious.  He  was  confided  in  by  members  of  the  bar,  and 
as  a  draughtsman  had  few  superiors.  He  never  encouraged  litigation, 
and  never  engaged  in  a  suit  which  should  injure  the  reputation  of 
an  honest  man.  As  an  advocate,  he  always  addressed  himself  to  the 
point ;  but  his  language  did  not  flow  easily  and  was  not  always 
accurate.  His  words  were  not  as  clear  as  his  thoughts ;  and  yet  he 
often  made  an  able  argument. 

Upon  the  bench.  Judge  Bronson  was  thoroughly  competent,  dis- 
charging his  duties  with  uprightness  and  ability.  His  naturally  strong 
and  discriminating  mind,  and   his   thorough   acquaintance   with   legal 


382  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKT. 

science,  well  fitted  liim  for  tbis  position,  No  man  was  better  proof 
against  ingenious  sopbistry;  less  likely  to  be  imposed  upon  by  refined 
legal  subtleties.  Tbere  doubtless  bave  been  more  learned  jurists;  but 
a  sounder  or  better  judge  bas  rarely  sat  in  tbe  courts  of  tbis  State- 
This  opinion  prevailed  inside  as  well  as  outside  tbe  bar.  Conse- 
quently, bis  decisions  commanded  respect. 

As  a  man.  Judge  Bronson  was  known  for  trutb,  fidelity  and  probity 
— for  bis  prudence,  good  judgment  and  admirable  common  sense.  For 
truth  he  had  such  veneration  that  be  never  indulged  in  the  common 
luxury  of  exaggeration.  Nor  would  be  speak  carelessly,  in  way  of 
statement,  even  on  unimportant  matters.  lie  did  not  allow  himself  to 
guess.  So  far  as  he  knew,  be  would  say,  but  would  not  go  a  step  be- 
yond. No  man  knew  better  the  limits  of  one's  own  knowledge.  If  bis 
opinion  was  required,  be  would  give  it,  cautiously,  as  a  judgment, 
aware  of  the  responsibility.  He  did  not  confound  facts  with  inferences. 
Rigidly  and  exactly  just,  it  is  believed  be  never  took  an  unfair  advantage 
of  the  necessities  of  his  fellow  men,  or  of  bis  own  position  or  knowledge.  If 
be  wished  to  buy,  he  was  willing  to  give  a  fair  price,  and  if  he  desired  to  sell, 
he  would  ask  no  more  than  tbe  thing  was  honestly  worth.  He  never  cried 
down  another  man's  goods  or  praised  his  own,  in  order  to  get  a  good 
bargain.  With  him,  tbere  was  no  haggling  or  chaffering  about  prices. 
What  he  would  do,  he  said  at  the  beginning,  and  that  was  the  end  of 
it.  If  a  person  tried  to  beat  him  down  in  bis  price,  be  would  sometimes 
raise  it,  and  then  get  what  he  asked.  If  be  was  cheated,  he  remem- 
bered it,  and  would  have  no  more  to  do  with  the  cheater.  If  a  man 
tried  to  get  an  undue  advantage,  he  considered  himself  at  liberty  to 
make  him  pay  for  it.  For  instance,  he  and  another  person,  whom  I 
shall  call  Mr.  A.,  owned  between  them  a  large  amount  of  mixed  proper- 
ty. When  ^they  came  to  divide,  they  agreed  to  assort  it,  throw  it  into 
two  parcels  and  then  draw  lots  for  the  parcels.  If  either  did  not  like 
his  allotment,  be  might  bid  for  a  choice.  The  lot  was  drawn,  and  each 
got  tbe  parcel  be  desired,  and  tbe  only  parcel  be  could  use.  This  both 
understood.  After  a  minute's  silence,  Mr.  A.  turned  to  Mr.  B.  and 
said— "  W^ell,  shall  you  bid  ?"  Mr.  B.— "  I  will  think  of  it."  Mr.  A.— 
"I  think  I  shall  bid."  Mr.  B.— "  Well,  what  will  you  give?"  Mr.  A. 
— "Ten  dollars."  Mr.  B. — "  I  will  take  it,  and  you  shall  bave  your 
choice."  Mr.  A. — "  When  will  you  execute  the  necessary  papers  ?" 
Mr.  B.— "Now."  Mr.  A. — "Well,  perhaps  we  will  put  it  ofi'  till  to- 
morrow." The  result  was  as  bad  been  foreseen.  Mr.  A.  chose  tbe 
property  which  had  been  distributed  to  him  by  lot,  and  paid  the  ten 
dollars. 


ArPENDix.  383 

Judge  Bronson's  opinions  and  judgments  on  common  affairs,  and  on 
all  those  subjects  with  which  his  life  had  made  him  familiar,  were  more 
relied  on,  perhaps,  than  those  of  any  man  in  the  section  of  the  State  in 
which  he  lived.  Few,  for  instance,  could  estimate  with  equal  precision 
the  powers  and  capacities  and  money  value  of  a  tract  of  land,  with 
which  he  had  been  unacquainted.  He  could  tell  with  great  accuracy 
what  land  would  produce,  and  on  this  knowledge  grounded  his  judg- 
ment. And  this  accuracy  was  extended  to  all  subjects  to  which  he 
gave  his  attention.  As  appraiser,  arbitrator,  commissioner  and  referee, 
his  services  were  much  sought. 

Judge  B.  was  hard  headed,  rather  incredulous  than  the  contrary, 
and  Avas  not  often  deceived  by  appearances.  Those  epidemic  excite- 
ments which  overthrow  the  reason  and  carry  down  the  masses  did  not 
move  him.  If  there  was  a  truth  at  the  foundation,  he  usually  found  it 
and  accepted  it,  but  could  see  no  good  from  getting  wild  over  it. 

Mr.  B.  always  had  a  taste  for  reading.  For  a  resident  of  a  country 
town,  he  had  a  large  law  library,  and  a  good  collection  of  miscellaneous 
books.  lie  was  familiar  with  theology,  history  and  politics.  He  stu- 
died thoroughly  the  masterly  volumes  of  Edwards,  and  was  conversant 
with  Bellamy  and  Dwight.  Chalmers'  essay  on  Christianity,  in  the 
Edinburgh  Encyclopedia,  he  admired  ;  but  the  later  productions  of  that 
distinguished  author  were  too  gorgeously  ornamented  for  his  severe 
taste.  As  a  historian  and  writer,  Hume  was  his  pattern-man.  The 
style  of  Robertson  was  too  much  adorned.  Bancroft  was  ambitious  and 
aflfected  ;  but  Prescott  he  liked.  Few  men  were  better  acquainted  with 
New  England  history.  He  read  old  Benjamin  Trumbull,  Hutchinson, 
Cotton  Mather;  and  was  at  home  among  the  chroniclers  of  the  Puri- 
tan faiih.  He  was  himself  a  Puritan,  and  reverenced  the  stern  simpli- 
city, the  deep  piety  and  unswerving  constancy  of  the  fathers  of  that  sect. 
Of  the  traditional  and  record-history  of  his  native  town — of  the  geneal- 
ogy of  its  old  families — he  knew  far  more  than  anybody  else.  His 
memory  for  facts,  dates,  numbers  and  statistics  in  general,  was  unsur- 
passed. He  had  a  good  mathematical_mind,  and  would  carry  more  figures 
in  his  head  than  anybody  the  writer  has  happened  to  know.  He  was  par- 
ticularly well  provided  with  geographical  information.  In  fact,  his  read- 
ing and  inquiries  took  a  wide  range.  His  favorite  papers  were  the  old 
Hartford  Courant  and  the  old  Connecticut  Journal.  These  he  read  from 
the  first  to  the  laist  line.  After  the  New  York  Observer  was  established 
he  took  that.  In  politics,  he  was  an  unflinching  Federalist,  and  did  not 
live  long  enough  to  repent  of  it.  Washington  and  Hamilton  were  his 
great  men  in  the  general  government.     At  home,  he  associated  himself 


SSi  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUET. 

witli  sucli  men  as  Nathaniel  Smith,  Roger  Minot  Slierman  and  David 
Daggett.  He  thought  honesty  and  capacity  the  important  qualifications 
of  a  public  officer.  Demagogues  and  trading  politicians  he  despised.  He 
flattered  nobody;  never  laid  aside  his  principles  for  a  temporary  advan- 
tage ;  never  shaped  his  opinions  to  the  company  he  was  in.  For  these 
reasons,  he  was  not  popular  with  the  masses.  Nor  were  his  manners 
calculated  to  ingratiate  him  with  the  multitude.  Those  who  knew  him 
well  liked  his  plain  blunt  way ;  but  others  were  repelled  by  it. 

Judge  Bronson  was  a  friend  of  order.  Slip-shod  ways — looseness  in 
business,  or  statement,  or  opinion,  or  faith,  he  could  ill  tolerate.  He 
liked  to  see  everything  done  in  an  orthodox  and  proper  manner ;  or  in 
other  words,  "  according  to  law."  Though  not  particularly  attached  to 
forms  and  never  blinded  by  them,  he  still  liked  "  the  good  old  ways." 
When  it  was  proposed,  thirty  years  ago,  to  warm  the  old  meeting  house 
by  stoves,  he  opposed  it.  When,  ten  years  later,  in  consequence  of  the 
new  fashions  having  crept  into  the  place,  a  general  wish  was  expressed 
that  the  congregation  should  sit  in  prayer  and  stand  during  singing,  he 
objected  to  the  change  mildly — saw  no  reason  for  it,  and  became  a  non- 
conformist. Thenceforth,  he  stood  when  others  sat,  and  sat  when  others 
stood.  At  first,  a  few  old  people  kept  him  company  ;  but  at  length,  he 
was  alone.  He  took  no  pride  in  being  singular,  but  was  not  afraid  to 
be  so.  Once,  in  a  fit  of  abstraction,  lie  stood  during  the  reading  of  the 
chapter,  but  this  did  not  discourage  him.  He  always  went  to  "  meet- 
ing," and  the  appearance  of  his  bolt,  upright  form,  near  the  pulpit,  dur- 
ing the  first  prayer,  will  never  be  forgotten.  He  united  with  the  church 
of  which  his  father,  grandfather  and  great  grandfather  had  been  dea- 
cons, in  Jan.  1833.  He  was  himself  made  a  deacon,  in  1838,  which 
oflSce  he  held  six  years  and  then  resigned. 

In  person,  Judge  Bronson  was  tall,  in  early  life  straight  and  athletic, 
about  six  feet  high,  with  sunken  eyes,  shaggy  eye  brows,  a  capacious 
forehead  and  a  swinging  gait.  He  had  a  good  constitution,  and  with 
few  exceptions,  enjoyed  uninterrupted  health.  In  September,  1850,  he 
was  taken  slightly  ill,  first  with  a  boil  upon  the  knee.  This  was  follow- 
ed by  erysipelatous  inflammation.  His  fine  physical  powers  gradually 
gave  way,  and  he  died  Dec.  11th,  1850. 

EXOS  BRONSON 

Was  the  eldest  son  of  Eli  and  Mehitable  (Atwater)  Bronson,  and  was 
born  in  that  part  of  Waterbury,  since  called  Middlebury,  March  31, 
1774.  lie  was  first  cousin  of  Isaac  Bronson,  the  financier  and  banker. 
Somewhat  late  in  life,  he   became   connected   with  Yale  College  and 


v^^^^  y/^^^^ 


APPENDIX.  385 

graduated  with  distinction  in  1798.  I  have  examined  in  manuscript 
what  appear  to  have  been  some  of  his  college  exercises  in  composition. 
They  evince  the  same  clearness  of  diction  and  thought  which  distinguish- 
ed his  writings  later  in  life.  After  leaving  college,  he  commenced  the 
study  of  law;  but  in  the  summer  of  1799,  I  find  him  in  Philadelphia. 
He  taught  there,  for  a  time,  the  old  Episcopal  Academy.  Conceiving  the 
idea  of  starting  a  political  paper,  he  entered  into  a  very  free  and  some- 
what protracted  correspondence  with  President  Dwight  on  the  sub- 
ject. As  a  result,  the  United  States  Gazette  of  Philadelphia  was  estab- 
lished, and  he  became  its  editor* — a  position  which  he  occupied  till  his 
death.  His  manifesto,  or  declaration  of  principles,  was  published  March 
5,  1801. 

Under  Mr.  Bronson's  management,  the  Gazette  became  the  leading 
newspaper  of  Philadelphia,  and  exercised  a  powerful  influence  through- 
out the  country.  The  editor  was  a  strong  Federalist,  bold  and  fearless 
in  the  expression  of  his  opinions.  Early  in  his  career,  he  used  to  write 
to  President  Dwight  for  counsel  and  advice.  The  President,  in  reply, 
counseled  prudence.  In  a  letter,  under  date  of  February  26,  1801,  he 
said — "  I  advise  you  to  avoid  exposing  yourself  to  a  prosecution.  There 
is  reason  to  believe  that  measures  of  this  nature  will,  not  reluctantly, 
be  pursued  ;  and  it  will  be  necessary  for  a  young  writer  to  be  more 
cautious  than  usual.  I  advise  you,  also,  by  all  means,  to  do  full  justice 
to  the  [incoming]  administration,  and  to  commend  it  whenever  truth 
will  permit." 

The  day  after  Mr.  Jeflferson's  inauguration,  (March  5,  1801,)  Mr. 
Bronson  came  out  with  some  remarks  addressed  to  his  *'  readers,"  con- 
ceived in  the  spirit  of  Dr.  Dwight's  recommendation.  He  promised 
to  make  no  factious  opposition  to  the  new  President — "  Should  Mr. 
Jetferson  [he  said]  commence  his  administration  with  a  view  to  support 
the  constitution  in  its  genuine  spirit  and  energy,  and  to  uphold  the  sys- 
tem established  and  pursued  by  Washington  with  so  much  honor  to 
the  country,  the  Federalists  will  join  hand  and  heart  with  him  and  sup- 
port him  against  the  machinations  of  those  unprincipled  demagogues 
who  have  already  reviled  and  belied  the  character  and  administration 
of  Washington,  and  are  now  struggling  to  raise  themselves  to  wealth 
and  importance  upon  the  ruins  of  the  government  itself. " 

Mr.  Bronson  was  an  earnest  Federalist  and  able  political  writer.  He 
found  occasion  to  oppose  Mr.  Jefferson's  administration,  and  he  did  it 


*  The  name  of  the  business  firm  was,  for  a  time,  Bronson  AChauncey.    Mr,  Chauncej's  name 
was  not  In  the  firm  in  1S05. 

25 


386  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUET. 

with  a  will.  He  denounced  the  Democratic  party  and  its  leaders,  in 
unmeasured  terras.  He  was  a  master  of  irony,  sarcasm  and  invective, 
and  was  not  always  free  from  personalities.  About  the  time  of  the 
declaration  of  war  against  Great  Britain,  party  spirit  ran  higher,  per- 
haps, than  has  since  been  known  in  this  country.  In  Baltimore,  a  riot 
occurred,  and  the  printing  office  of  a  Federal  newspaper  was  destroyed. 
Mr.  Bronson's  office  was  threatened  with  a  similar  fate.  He  received 
many  anonymous  letters,  warning  him  of  his  danger.  Some  were  from 
enemies  threatening  to  serve  him  as  some  of  his  party  in  Baltimore  had 
been  served,  if  he  did  not  desist  from  his  abuse  of  the  administration 
and  the  Democratic  leaders.  Others,  apparently  friends,  counseled 
moderation  and  discretion.  These  letters,  gathered  into  a  bundle 
and  inclosed  in  a  wrapper,  are  now  before  me.  On  the  wrapper  is 
written,  in  the  hand  of  the  receiver,  "  Good  Advice,  or  wholesome  Les- 
sons on  Prudence."  On  one  occasion,  the  Gazette  office  was  threaten- 
ed, and  a  night  appointed  for  its  destruction.  On  that  night.  Dr.  Chap- 
man, Charles  Chauncey,  Horace  Binney,  Dr.  Bird  Wilson,  John  B. 
Wallace,  Thomas  Biddle  (all  intimate  friends  of  Mr.  Bronson)  and 
others  are  stated  to  have  stood  guard  in  and  around  the  menaced  build- 
ing, prepared  to  resist  an  attack. 

Mr.  Bronson  wrote  with  great  vigor  and  directness,  in  a  pure,  lucid 
and  simple  style,  wielding  old  Saxon  with  great  effect.  In  reference  to 
his  habits  of  composition,  Dr.  Nathaniel  Chapman  is  affirmed  to  have 
said  that  his  editorials  were  written  in  his  office,  while  he  was  surround- 
ed by  friends  engaged  in  political  discussions,  in  which  he  would  at  in- 
tervals join.  When  the  printer's  devil  came  down  for  more  copy,  he 
would  tear  off  the  sheet  on  which  he  was  writing,  at  the  last  word,  sel- 
dom finding  it  necessary  to  make  the  smallest  correction.  Dr.  Chap- 
man was  his  family  physician,  and  told  a  friend  that  he  was  the  only 
yankee  he  ever  knew  who  never  learned  the  value  of  money. 

Soon  after  Mr.  Bronson  became  connected  with  the  Gazette,  the 
office  issued,  under  his  supervision,  an  edition  of  William  Roscoe's  Life 
of  Lorenzo  de  Medici.  One  object  of  the  undertaking  was  to  cultivate 
in  the  American  mind  a  taste  for  literature  and  history.  The  publica- 
tion led  to  a  correspondence  with  Mr.  Roscoe,  and  to  the  subsequent 
issue  from  the  Gazette  office  of  an  edition  of  Leo  X,  by  the  same  author. 
The  correspondence,  which  is  in  my  possession,  is  honorable  to  both 
parties. 

Mr.  Bronson  married,  in  Philadelphia,  Mary  White,  a  daughter  of 
the  late  Bishop  White,  by  whom  he  had  five  daughters  and  two  sons. 
But  two  of  them  are  now  living ;  one  the  widow  of  the  late  Professor 


APPENDIX.  387 

H.  Reed  who  was  lost  in  the  Arctic ;  the  other  the  Rev.  William  White 
Bronson,  an  Episcopal  clergyman,  now  of  Reading  Ridge,  Conn. 

The  subject  of  this  notice  died  April  17,  1823.  Immediately  after- 
wards, the  following  notice  appeared  in  the  Baltimore  Chronicle  : 

"  Then  burst  a  noble  heart."  It  was  with  pecuhar  and  painful  awakening  of 
old  reminiscences,  while  turning  over  the  Philadelphia  papers  of  yesterday  morn- 
ing, that  we  discovered  the  death  of  Enos  Bronson  announced,  formerly  the  editor 
of  the  United  States  Gazette.  Under  an  extreme  coldness  of  manner,  amounting 
almost  to  an  appearance  of  apathy,  dwelt  a  warm  and  benevolent  heart,  alive  to 
all  the  tender  impulses,  blended  with  uncommon  boldness  and  decision.  His  char- 
acter reminds  us  of  those  tracts  of  mountainous  country  described  by  geogra- 
phers, where,  passing  from  the  region  of  frost  and  snow,  we  discover  verdure,  ght- 
tering  cascades,  and  all  the  forms  of  vernal  beauty.  Misfortune  could  make  him 
wretched,  but  could  not  make  him  dishonest.  His  manner,  his  countenance,  his 
personal  appearance,  are  brought  so  forcibly  to  our  fancy,  that  it  requires  some 
effort  to  believe  him  now  a  cold,  motionless,  speechless  corpse,  slumbering  be- 
neath the  sods  of  the  valley. 

DEA.  JAMES  BROWN 

Was  a  son  of  Stephen  and  Eunice  (Loomis)  Brown,  and  was  born  in 
Windsor,  Dec.  2,  1776.  He  learned  of  his  father  the  trade  of  a  black- 
smith, and  at  the  age  of  twenty-one,  removed  to  Canton,  where  he  re- 
mained one  year.  He  then  came  to  Waterbury  and  made  an  engage- 
ment with  Lieut.  Ard  Welton,  who  manufactured  fire  arms  in  the  Saw- 
mill Plain  District,  at  the  place  now  or  recently  owned  by  Sherman 
Bronson.  After  about  two  years,  he  removed  into  the  village,  where 
he  labored  at  his  trade  the  remainder  of  his  life. 

Mr.  Brown  in  early  life  connected  himself  with  a  military  company, 
and  finally  became  the  colonel  of  his  regiment.  He  was  an  original 
partner  in  the  third  rolling  mill  which  was  erected  in  Waterbury,  in 
1830,  afterwards  known  as  the  Brown  &  Elton  Co.,  and  continued  in 
the  connection  till  his  decease.  He  was  a  member  of  the  first  Congre- 
gational church  and  was  made  a  deacon  in  1818.  He  was  also  a  mem- 
ber of  the  masonic  order. 

Dea.  Brown  was  remarkable  for  his  truth,  industry  and  sobriety.  He 
was  a  most  exemplary  man,  faithful  in  all  the  relations  of  life.  Long 
after  his  frugal  habits  and  success  in  business  had  secured  him  a  compe- 
tency, he  continued  to  labor  in  his  calling,  believing  he  could  thus  best 
fulfill  the  ends  of  existence.  He  was  a  constant  attendant  upon  the 
services  and  duties  of  the  church,  with  which  he  was  connected  thirty 
years.     He  died  in  1848. 


388  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURT. 

CALVIN  BUTLER 

Was  born  in  Wolcott,  Oct.  6,  1772;  removed  in  childhood  with  his 
parents  to  New  Marlborough,  Mass. ;  entered  Williams  College  in  1795, 
but  took  a  dismission  at  the  end  of  sophomore  year ;  read  law  at  Nor- 
walk  with  Edmund  Akins  and  Augustus  Pettibone,  Esquires;  was  ad- 
mitted to  the  bar  of  Litchfield  County  in  December,  1799  ;  commenc- 
ed practice  in  North  Canaan,  Conn.,  but  removed  in  February,  1801,  to 
Bristol,  and  in  1806,  to  Plymouth;  was  a  state  representative  several 
times  in  1815  and  afterwards  ;  was  a  member  of  the  constitutional  con- 
vention in  1818;  a  state  senator  in  1832  ;  judge  of  probate  from  1832 
to  1842,  and  a  judge  of  ihe  Litchfield  County  Court  in  1839.  He 
died  several  years  since. 

EEV.  AARON  BUTTON, 

The  son  (the  youngest  of  nine  children)  of  Thomas  and  Anne  (Rice) 
Dutton,  was  born  in  that  part  of  Waterbury,  which  is  now  Watertown, 
May  21,  1780.  He  pursued  his  classical  studies  under  the  direction  of 
Rev.  Azel  Backus  of  Bethlem;  graduated  at  Yale  College  in  1803;  was 
instructed  in  Theology  by  President  Dwight ;  was  licensed  to  preach  in 
Oct.  1805,  and  ordained  Dec.  10,  1805,  as  pastor  of  the  First  church 
and  society  in  Guilford.  He  resigned  his  charge  June  8,  1842,  mainly 
on  account  of  a  difference  of  opinion  between  himself  and  his  people 
on  slavery.  He  was  a  member  of  the  Corporation  of  Yale  College  from 
1825  till  his  decease. 

A  few  months  after  his  separation  from  his  people,  he  went,  in  the 
service  of  the  Home  Missionary  Society,  to  Iowa,  (then  a  Territory,) 
and  was  invited  to  settle  over  the  church  and  society  of  Burlington. 
When  about  to  return  to  New  England  to  make  arrangements  for  a 
permanent  removal  to  the  West,  he  was  taken  sick.  He  reached  New 
Haven  with  difiiculty,  and  had  a  long  and  dangerous  illness,  from  which 
he  never  completely  recovered.  He  died  in  June,  1849,  and  was  buried 
in  the  midst  of  his  former  people  in  Guilford.  His  wife,  Dorcas, 
({daughter  of  Samuel  Southmayd  of  Watertown,)  to  whom  he  was  mar- 
■ried  in  April,  1806,  died  in  Sept.  1841. 

Mr.  Dutton  was  an  earnest,  faithful  and  fearless  man,  respected 
among  the  churches,  and  true  in  all  the  relations  of  life.  He  was  an 
early  and  consistent  friend  of  temperance  and  emancipation,  and  was 
ready  to  suffer,  if  need  be,  in  the  discharge  of  what  he  esteemed  his 
duty.  He  published  a  few  sermons,  and  was  a  contributor  to  the  old 
Christian  Spectator. 


APPENDIX.  389 


REV.  MATTDEW  RICE  DUTTON, 

The  son  of  Thomas,  and  the  grandson  of  Dea.  Thomas  Button,  was 
born  in  Watertown,  (Westbuiy  parish,)  June  30,  1783.  When  about 
eleven  years  of  age,  his  father  removed  to  Northbury  parish,  and  thence 
in  two  years  more,  to  Northfield,  in  the  town  of  Litchfield.  At  the  age 
of  seventeen,  he  entered  the  law  office  of  Ephraira  Kirby  of  Litchfield; 
but  in  consequence  of  bad  eyes  and  broken  health,  he  was  obliged  to 
abandon  his  studies.  lie  afterwards  changed  bis  plans  and  concluded 
to  enter  Yale  College,  where  he  graduated  with  high  honor,  in  1808. 
He  then  took  charge  of  the  Academy  in  Fairfield,  and  after  a  year 
joined  the  Theological  Seminary  of  Andover.  From  1810  to  1814,  he 
was  a  tutor  in  Yale  College,  suffering  severely  all  the  time  from  weak  eyes. 

Mr.  Dutton  was  ordained  pastor  of  the  church  in  Stratford  in  the 
autum  of  1814,  where  he  remained,  universally  beloved,  till  his  election 
to  the  professorship  of  Mathematics  and  Natural  Philosophy  in  Yale 
College,  in  the  fall  of  1821.  He  accepted  the  appointment,  and  devoted 
himself  with  ardor  to  his  duties.  Mathematics  was  his  favorite  study. 
His  constitution,  always  delicate,  was  not  equal  to  his  labors.  "  The 
hours  of  sleep  were  spent,  apparently  with  great  satisfaction  to  himself, 
in  solving  difficult  theorems  in  Mathematics,  or  abstruse  questions  in 
Metaphysics.  No  physical  machinery  could  have  lasted  long  under 
such  constant  pressure."*  His  physical  powers  were  soon  prostrated,  and 
he  died  in  July,  18ii5.  His  funeral  sermon  was  preached  by  Professor 
Fitch. 

Professor  Dutton  was  married,  soon  after  he  became  a  pastor  in  Strat- 
ford, to  Maria,  daughter  of  Dr.  Asa  Hopkins  of  Hartford,  by  whom  he 
had  two  sons.     His  widow  and  sons  still  survive. 

ALMON  FARRELL. 
He  was  the  son  of  Zeba  Farrell  of  Waterbury.  He  learned  of  his 
father  the  trade  of  a  mill-wright,  and  for  many  years  was  the  leading 
mill-wright,  machinist,  engineer,  builder  and  contractor,  in  his  line,  in 
the  Naugatuck  Valley.  There  is  probably  no  man  in  the  State  who 
has  superintended  the  construction  of  so  many  first  class  mills  and  man- 
ufacturing establishments.  He  was  noted  for  the  strength  and  perma- 
nency of  his  work.  Monuments  of  his  skill  may  be  seen  in  Waterbury, 
Seymour,  Ansonia,  Birmingham,  Plymouth  Hollow,  Wolcottville,  Bris- 
tol, Westville,  Pequonnock,  Newtown,  <fec.    At  the  time  of  his  death,  be 

*  See  Sprague's  Annals  of  the  American  Pulpit. 


390  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUEY. 

had  a  large  contract  in  Chicago,  111.  Whatever  he  put  his  hand  to  was 
carried  through  successfully;  not  always  inexpensively,  but  with  good 
judgment  and  thorough  workmanship. 

Mr.  Farrell  was  a  self-taught  man,  whose  success  was  owing  to  his 
own  native  genius,  and  whose  services  in  building  up  the  manufactur- 
ing interests  in  his  native  town  and  the  Naugatuck  Valley  could  hardly 
have  been  dispensed  with.  He  died  in  the  prime  of  life  and  the  midst 
of  his  usefulness,  May  31,  1857. 

DEA.   THOMAS  FENN, 

The  son  of  Thomas  Fenn,  was  born  in  Wallingford  in  1735,  and  removed 
to  Westbury  in  early  life  with  his  father.  April  19,  1760,  he  married 
Abi,  (or  Abiah,)  daughter  of  Richard  Welton  of  Waterbury,  by  whom 
he  had  six  sons  and  two  daughters.  He  was  a  captain  in  the  Revolu- 
tionary war,  and  a  representative,  first  from  Waterbury  and  next  from 
Watertown,  in  all,  thirty -five  sessions,  beginning  in  1778.  He  was  also 
a  justice  of  the  peace  and  a  deacon  of  the  Congregational  church  of 
Watertown  for  many  years.  Through  a  long  life  he  was  an  influen- 
tial and  much  respected  citizen.     He  died  Aug.  1,  1818. 

EBENEZER  FOOTE. 

He  was  the  eldest  son  of  Capt.  John  Foote  by  his  second  wife,  Mary 
Peck.  He  was  born  in  Westbury,  July  6,  1773,  on  the  farm  on  which 
his  grandfather.  Dr.  Thomas  Foote,  first  settled  in  1736,  which  his  father 
owned  and  which  still  remains  in  the  family,  being  now  iu  the  possession 
of  Hubert  Scovill.  His  father  was  an  industrious  and  successful  farmer,  , 
and  died  July  5,  1809,  aged  66  years.  His  eldest  sister  by  the  same 
mother  married  Thomas  J.  Davies  of  Watertown,  aftewards  of  St.  Law- 
rence County,  N.  Y.,  who  were  the  parents  of  the  first  wife  of  the  late 
William  H.  Scovill  of  Waterbury.  His  next  younger  brother,  John,  re- 
ceived a  liberal  education,  was  a  man  of  brilliant  parts,  studied  the  pro- 
fession of  law,  which  he  had  not  health  to  pursue,  and  died  at  his 
father's  house  in  1806,  aged  31. 

Ebenezer  worked  on  the  ftirm  till  he  was  twenty  years  of  age,  it  being 
the  intention  of  his  father  that  he  should  be  the  farmer  of  the  family. 
At  this  time,  however,  he  changed  his  purpose.  He  desired  to  acquire 
an  education  and  to  enter  the  legal  profession,  his  brother  John,  at  that 
period,  expecting  to  become  a  minister.  His  parents  did  not  oppose  his 
wishes,  and  after  the  farm  work  of  the  season  was  over,  in  ,the  fall  of 
1792,  he  went  to  Cheshire  and  began  his  classical  studies  under  the  di- 
rection of  the  Rev.  John  Foot,  the  Congregational  minister  of  that  town, 


APPENDIX. 


391 


with  a  view  of  joining  the  sophomore  or  junior  class  of  college  For 
nearly  two  years  he  devoted  his  time  to  these  studies,  and  to  teaching 
school  for  the  purpose  of  paying  expenses.  Finding  it  required  a  large 
share  of  his  time  to  earn  the  means  of  support,  and  that  a  regular  col- 
lege course  would  delay,  for  several  years,  the  period  of  his  entering  the 
profession,  he  concluded  to  abandon  the  studies  he  was  then  pursuing, 
and  to  enter  at  once  his  chosen  pursuit.  Accordingly,  he  joined  the 
celebrated  law  school  in  Litchfield,  then  under  the  charge  of  the  Hon. 
Tapping  Reeve,  with  which  he  was  connected  two  years,  though  he  was 
obliged  still  to  devote  a  part  of  his  time  to  school -keeping.  In  Decem- 
ber, 1796,  he  was  admitted  to  the  bar  of  the  State  of  Connecticut,  and 
removed  to  Lansingburgh,  Rensselaer  Co.,  N.  Y.  In  the  ensuing  Feb- 
ruary he  sold  the  land  which  his  father  had  given  him  on  reaching  his 
majority,  and  which  he  had  reserved  for  an  emergency,  and  devoted  the 
proceeds  to  the  purchase  of  an  outfit  for  professional  life. 

After  the  study  of  a  few  months,  or  in  Nov.  1797,  he  was  admitted 
to  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  of  Rensselaer  County,  and  soon  after  to 
the  other  and  higher  courts  of  the  State.  "  A  strong  constitution,  a 
large  and  vigorous  frame,  a  full  and  manly  voice,  a  mature  intellect,  a 
ready  and  rough  wit,  together  with  uncommon  self-reliance,  fitted  him 
for  success  in  the  profession  he  had  chosen,"  and  he  obtained  it  at  once. 
He  early  acquired  the  confidence  of  the  old  Republican  party  of  his 
adopted  State,  and  became  an  active  and  influential  member  of  it.  In 
consequence  of  the  friendship  and  intimacy  which  existed  between  him 
and  the  late  Chief  Justice  Spencer,  the  ruling  spirit  of  the  party  at  that 
day,  his  political  opponents  used  to  call  him  "  Spencer's  Foote."  As 
early  as  1801,  Mr.  Foote  had  acquired  considerable  reputation  in  his 
profession,  and  attracted  the  notice  and  obtained  the  friendship  of  Gov. 
George  Clinton.  So  high  an  estimate  did  the  Governor  put  on  his  tal- 
ents and  worth,  that  in  August  of  the  year  named  he  caused  him  to  be 
appointed  assistant  attorney-general  for  the  district  comprehending  the 
counties  of  Rensselaer,  Columbia  and  Greene.  The  duties  of  this  office, 
requiring  high  professional  talents,  Mr.  Foote  discharged  for  several 
years,  and  with  entire  satisfaction  to  the  public. 

In  process  of  time,  Mr.  Foote  removed  to  Troy,  the  shire  town  of  the 
county,  and  more  advantageously  situated  for  business  than  Lansing- 
burgh. Soon  after  his  change  of  residence,  he  entered  into  copartner- 
ship with  John  Bird,  Esq.,  which  lasted  for  several  years.  The  early 
death  of  Mr.  Bird,  a  gentleman  of  brilliant  intellect  and  finished  scholar- 
ship, dissolved  it.  After  that,  Mr.  Foote  pursued  his  profession  alone  for 
some  time ;  but,  finding  that  his  extensive  practice  in  the  courts  render- 


392  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBURY. 

ed  it  irapossible  to  give  the  requisite  attention  to  the  attorney's  business 
in  the  office,  he  formed  a  new  connection.  Thenceforth,  he  acted  as 
counselor  and  advocate,  his  partner  staying  in  the  office  performing  the 
duties  of  attorney  and  soh'citor.  They  did  a  large  and  very  prosperous 
business.  In  1808,  however,  the  partnership  was  dissolved,  and  Mr. 
Foote  removed  to  Albany,  the  capital  of  the  State,  on  account  of  the 
greater  facilities  it  afforded  for  the  practice  of  his  profession.  There  he 
continued  till  his  death,  having  generally  a  junior  partner  in  his  office. 
During  this  period,  he  took  an  active  part  in  politics,  and  was  an  ardent 
and  able  supporter  of  the  principles  of  his  party.  He  wrote  for  the 
press,  and  his  influence  as  a  politician  kept  pace  with  his  professional 
reputation.  On  one  occasion,  he  was  a  prominent  candidate  for  United 
States  Senator,  with  a  prospect  of  election  ;  but  his  friends  did  not  suc- 
ceed in  their  object. 

In  July,  1814,  Mr.  Foote  attended  the  Circuit  Court  of  Rensselaer 
County,  held  in  Troy,  and  was  engaged  in  several  important  trials.  His 
temperament  was  ardent  and  the  weather  unusually  warm.  A  bilious 
fever  came  on,  perhaps  as  the  consequence  of  over-exertion.  He  return- 
ed home,  obtained  medical  aid,  and  nothing  serious  was  apprehended 
for  several  days.  But  on  the  fourth  or  fifth  day  of  his  illness,  the  dis- 
ease began  to  assume  an  alarming  aspect.  It  terminated  fatally,  after  a 
violent  and  painful  struggle,  which  his  robust  constitution  maintained  for 
hours,  on  the  21st  of  the  month  and  twelfth  day  of  his  sickness. 

Mr.  Foote  was  a  large  man,  full  six  feet  in  height,  with  a  well  formed, 
muscular  and  manly  frame  and  a  good  constitution. 

Mr.  Foote  had  a  strong  and  active  mind,  and  "  had  he  enjoyed  the 
advantages  of  an  early  and  thorough  education,  would  have  had  few 
equals  in  this  country.  As  he  was,  he  had  no  superiors  in  the  State  of 
his  adoption  in  those  contests  at  the  bar  where  ready  wit,  strong  and 
discriminating  judgment,  powerful  reasoning  and  great  intellectual  re- 
sources were  essential  to  success.  He  excelled  particularly  in  trials  be- 
fore juries.  He  wrote  as  he  spoke,  with  vigor  and  wit,  but  without  the 
elegance  or  polish  of  a  finished  scholar.  A  brief  notice  like  the  present 
will  not  permit  a  reference  to  any  of  the  important  causes  in  which  he 
was  engaged,  nor  extracts  from  his  speeches,  many  of  which  were  pub- 
lished in  the  newspapers  and  pamphlets  of  the  day,  nor  even  a  recital  of 
the  many  anecdotes  told  of  him,  but  which  show  the  force  and  brilliancy 
of  his  unpolished  but  exhaustless  and  spicy  wit." 

Mr.  Foote  had  a  warm  and  generous  heart,  and  was  more  ready  to 
help  his  relations  and  friends  than  provide  for  himself.  He  was  liberal 
to  a  fault.     He  contributed  freely  in  aid  of  his  brother,  Samuel  Alfred 


APPENDIX.  393 

in  obtaining  an  education ;  and  though  the  latter  afterwards  repaid  his 
advances  with  interest,  they  were  not  made  with  the  expectation  of  any 
return. 

Mr.  Foote's  name  deserves  to  be  mentioned  in  connection  with  the 
Albany  Female  Academy,  which  has  long  been  one  of  the  most  impor- 
tant institutions  of  the  kind  in  this  country.  It  was  established  in  Feb- 
ruary, 1814,  under  the  name  of  "Union  School  in  Montgomery  street." 
Mr.  Foote  started  the  project  and  obtained  most  of  the  subscriptions.* 

REV.  LUTHER  HART, 

The  son  of  David  and  Hannah  (Hudson)  Hart,  was  born  in  Goshen, 
Conn.,  July  2  7,  1783.  His  parents  were  persons  of  worth  and  resjiect- 
abilily,  and  his  mother  a  woman  of  a  superior  mind,  descended  from  a 
family  of  Long  Island.  In  childhood,  he  was  distinguished  for  his  fond- 
ness of  books,  his  facility  of  learning  and  his  love  of  music.  In  his 
sixteenth  year,  he  became  religious,  joined  the  church  in  Torrington, 
where  the  family  then  resided,  and  felt  a  desire  to  enter  the  ministry. 
The  expense,  however,  was  an  effectual  barrier  to  his  desires ;  and  he 
remained,  contentedly,  at  home,  and  learned  of  his  father  the  trade  of  a 
house-carpenter.  In  the  mean  time,  he  became  familiar  with  the  rudi- 
ments of  an  English  education,  and  obtained  an  intimate  knowledge  of 
men  and  things — of  human  nature,  as  seen  in  the  affairs  of  common  life 
— of  which  clergymen,  as  a  class,  are  lamentably  deficient.  His  trade 
he  never  forgot.  He  continued  to  exercise  his  skill  as  a  worker  in  wood 
through  life — during  his  early  and  preparatory  studies,  for  the  profit,  and 
at  a  later  period,  for  exercise  and  recreation.  Only  a  few  months  before 
his  death,  he  put  his  house  in  complete  repair,  making  several  alterations 
to  add  to  its  convenience,  and  doing  the  work  mostly  with  his  own 
hands.f 

Late  in  1802,  or  early  in  1803,  Mr.  Hart  commenced  a  course  of 
study  preparatory  for  college,  under  the  direction  of  his  pastor.  Rev. 
Alexander  Gillet ;  and  in  September  of  the  latter  year,  became  a  mem- 
ber of  Yale  College.  He  at  once  took  a  high  rank  as  a  scholar;  and 
at  his  graduation  in  1807,  received  one  of  the  highest  honors  of  the  in- 
stitution, having  the  appointment  of  orator.  The  succeeding  year,  he 
spent  in  Litchfield,  South  Farms,  as  teacher  of  the  Academy,  and  then 
commenced  his  theological  studies  with  the  Rev.  Dr.  Porter  of  Wash- 

*  For  the  materials  of  this  sketch,  I  am  indebted  to  a  biographical  notice  in  Goodwin's  Gene- 
alogy of  the  Foote  Family. 

+  See  a  sketch  of  the  Life  and  Character  of  the  Rev.  Luther  Hart,  in  the  Quarterly  Christian 
Spectator  for  September,  1S84,  which  I  have  used  freely  in  the  preparation  of  this  notice. 


394  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBURY. 

ington,  Conn.  Soon  after,  however,  he  went  to  the  seminary  at  Ando- 
ver,  Mass.,  finished  his  preparatory  course,  and  was  of  the  first  class  of 
its  graduates.  A  short  interval  passed,  and  he  was  invited  to  preach 
in  Plymouth,  where  he  was  ordained  and  installed  over  the  Congrega- 
tional church  and  society  in  September,  1810,  and  where  he  remained 
till  his  death.  The  society  was  somewhat  distracted,  at  the  time,  in 
consequence  of  a  difference  of  opinion  as  to  the  merits  of  difi"erent  can- 
didates;  but  all  became  united  and  harmonious,  in  a  short  period, 
under  his  ministry.  The  year  after  his  settlement,  he  married  Minerva, 
the  only  daughter  of  Gen.  Daniel  and  Martha  (Humaston)  Potter.  She 
still  survives. 

The  following  extract  from  the  article  in  the  Christian  Spectator  de- 
scribes graphically  some  of  Mr.  Hart's  characteristic  traits  : 

Together  with  rich  and  various  learning,  and  habits  strictly  intellectual,  he 
had  an  uncommon  measure  of  native  sagacity — a  kind  of  intuitive  discernment  of 
character — and  quick  sense  of  propriety.  He  had  also  a  lovely  temper  and  a 
warm  and  generous  heart.  He  called  himself  impetuous — he  was  really  ardent — 
yet  his  self-government,  for  aught  that  appeared,  was  uniform  and  complete.  The 
quality,  however,  which,  more  than  almost  any  other,  was  prominent  in  him,  and 
will  most  readily  suggest  itself  to  his  acquaintances,  with  the  mention  of  his  name, 
was  his  sprightliness  of  fancy,  his  aptness  for  pleasant  and  humorous  associations, 
and  delicately  keen  and  pithy  satire.  At  the  same  time,  he  was  not  found  in  this 
respect,  either  transgressing  the  law  of  kindness,  or  sinking  the  dignity  of  the 
Christian  or  ministerial  character.  One  would  be  often  struck  with  the  rapid  and 
easy  manner  in  which  he  would  glide  away  from  the  happiest  sallies  of  pleasant- 
ry into  the  most  serious  and  tender  strain  of  rehgious  remark.  There  was  often, 
too,  a  meaning  in  his  tones  and  modulations  of  voice,  in  the  cast  of  his  eye,  and 
the  entire  expression  of  his  countenance,  which  w^ords  could  not  convey.  In 
general  it  may  be  said  of  him,  that  his  good  sense,  his  pleasant  wit,  his  fund  of 
knowledge,  his  openness  and  benignity  of  heart,  and  his  unaffected  and  consistent 
piety,  made  him  a  most  engaging  friend  and  companion,  and  his  house  an  ever- 
loved,  as  it  was  an  ever-welcome  resort.  One  who  was  his  companion  in  youth, 
and  more  intimately  conversant  with  him  in  professional  life  than  almost  any 
other,  has  said  of  him — "  I  always  found  it  impossible  to  be  long  with  him,  with- 
out feeling  myself  to  be  in  the  presence  of  a  great  and  good  man  ;  and  yet  with 
his  friends,  as  is  well  known,  he  often  manifested  the  playfulness  and  simplicity  of 
a  child." 

Mr.  Hart  was  an  interesting  and  able  preacher.  Few  in  the  part  of 
the  State  in  which  he  lived  were  so  generally  acceptable.  The  writer  well 
remembers  the  lively  pleasure  with  which  his  presence  used  to  be  greet- 
ed in  the  pulpit  of  his  own  parish,  thirty -five  years  ago.  He  %vould  fix  the 
attention  of  all  classes — a  certain  evidence  of  talent — and  would  utter 
sentences  which  penetrated  the  mind  and  burned  in  the  heart.     At  the 


APPENDIX.  395 

same  time,  he  was  dignified  and  decorous,  resorting  to  no  stratagems, 
practicing  no  deception.  His  sermons  were  thoroughly  studied,  but  in 
the  latter  part  of  his  life,  not  written  at  length.  They  were  original 
in  thought,  compact  and  clear  in  argument,  nervous  in  expression  and 
simple  in  language. 

In  conversation,  Mr.  Hart  was  lively,  easy  and  familiar,  with  an 
abundant  flow  of  spirits,  putting  those  in  his  company  in  the  same  frame 
of  mind.  His  sallies  of  wit,  his  pleasantries,  his  piquancy  and  original- 
ity, his  homely  and  often  quaint  expressions,  combined  with  his 
artlessness  and  kindness  of  manner,  made  his  society  exceedingly 
agreeable. 

In  the  year  1818,  Mr.  Hart  was  associated  with  Dr.  Tyler,  Dr.  Tay- 
lor, Professor  Goodrich  and  one  or  two  others,  as  a  committee  for  the 
publication  of  certain  doctrinal  tracts.  He  wrote  the  third  of  the  series, 
a  tract  of  forty-three  pages,  entitled,  "  Plain  Pteasons  for  relying  on 
Presbyterian  Ordination,"  in  a  letter  to  a  friend,  of  which  one  compe- 
tent to  judge,  remarks — "  We  doubt  whether  the  language  affords  a 
better  manual  for  common  Christians,  on  this  much  agitated  subject." 
This  enterprise  led,  in  another  year,  to  the  establishment  of  the  Christ- 
ian Spectator,  to  some  of  the  early  volumes  of  which  he  was  an  import- 
ant contributor.  When  this  periodical,  a  few  years  later,  became  the 
Quarterly  Christian  Spectator,  he  continued  his  connection  with  it,  and 
furnished  for  it  several  able  and  interesting  articles.  For  the  June  num- 
ber of  1830,  he  prepared  the  "  Review  on  the  Early  history  of  the  Con- 
gregational Churches  in  New  England."  In  the  next  number,  appeared 
his  review  of  Bellamy,  entitled  "Review  of  True  Religion  Delineated." 
In  June,  1833,  he  furnished  the  paper  called  "View  of  the  Religious 
Declension  in  New  England  during  the  latter  half  of  the  Eighteenth 
Century  ;"  and  in  September  of  the  same  year,  the  article  on  the  "  Char- 
acter and  Writings  of  Dr.  Strong."  These  four  articles,  making  over 
one  hundred  pages,  are  consecutive  portions  of  a  complete  history  of 
the  religious  declensions  and  revivals  in  New  England  during  the  eight- 
eenth century,  and  present,  it  has  been  said,  a  more  clear  and  authentic, 
and  more  comprehensive  and  complete  account  than  is  to  be  found  else- 
where in  the  same  compass.  The  whole  was  the  result  of  a  very 
laborious  and  thorough  investigation. 

Mr.  Hart  was  a  Fellow  of  Yale  College,  and  died,  leaving  no  child- 
ren, April  25,  1834.  His  funeral  was  attended,  on  the  28th,  "amidst 
the  bursting  grief  of  a  large  concourse  of  ministers,  and  other  friends, 
from  the  adjoining  towns,  together  with  the  bereaved  church  and  people 
of  his  charge.     Few  persons  have  ever  witnessed  a  more  deep  and  gen- 


396  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

eral  expression  of  sorrow,  than  was  manifested  by  that  people  when, 
for  the  last  time,  they  hung  upon  those  lips  that  were  to  speak  no 
more." 

DAVID  HOADLEY 

Was  the  second  son  of  Lemuel  and  Urania  (Mallory)  Hoadley,  and  was 
born  in  Waterbury  (old  society)  April  29, 1774.  He  learned  the  trade 
of  house-carpenter,  and  soon  became  distinguished  as  a  builder.  lie  was 
employed  upon  the  Congregational  meeting  house,  in  1795,  and  erected 
the  dwelling  of  the  late  Judge  Kingsbury.  He  afterwards  constructed 
a  Congregational  house  in  Milford.  The  reputation  he  thus  obtained 
was  the  occasion  of  his  being  invited  to  superintend  the  construction  of 
the  North  Congregational  church  in  New  Haven,  to  which  place  he 
removed  with  his  family,  in  1814.  He  afterwards  erected  the  "Don 
DeForest"  house  on  the  corner  of  Elm  and  Church  streets,  in  New 
Haven,  and  the  house  next  adjoining  on  the  west,  then  owned  by  Hon. 
Nathan  Smith.  He  also  built  the  Tontine,  so  called,  and  a  large  man- 
sion house  in  Middletown,  owned  by  Samuel  Russel,  Esq. 

As  a  self  taught  architect,  Mr.  Hoadley  had  few  superiors.  He  broke 
down,  however,  while  still  in  the  vigor  of  manhood,  and  returned  to 
Waterbury  late  in  life  to  spend  the  remnant  of  his  days.  He  had  a 
sound  judgment,  a  well  balanced  mind,  a  generous  and  honest  heart, 
and  died  about  1840.  His  remains  were  deposited  in  the  old  burying 
yard,  over  which  a  monument  was  erected,  on  which  there  is  only  the 
brief  inscription  "  Hoadley."  His  widow,  Rachel  Hoadley,  died  at  the 
house  of  her  son-in-law,  John  C.  Palmer,  in  Hartford,  April  12,  1857,, 
aged  77. 

CAPT.  REUBEN  HOLMES, 

Son  of  Israel  and  Sarah  (Judd)  Holmes,  was  born  at  Waterbury,  Feb. 
11th,  1798.  While  a  boy  he  was  distinguished  for  great  activity  of 
body  and  mind.  Few  of  his  youthful  companions  were  able  to  com- 
pete with  him,  either  in  his  studies  or  in  boyish  and  athletic  sports.  He 
entered  the  Military  Academy  at  West  Point,  in  June,  1819.  He  sus- 
tained a  very  high  standing  there,  never  having  been  numbered  lower 
than  fourth  on  the  merit  roll  of  his  class  at  its  annual  examinations. 
He  was  assistant  professor  of  Drawing  one  year,  and  of  Mathematics 
one  year,  while  at  the  Academy;  and  when  he  graduated  in  June,  1823, 
he  delivered  the  valedictory  address.  He  was  immediately  commis- 
sioned as  second  lieut.  in  the  6th  infantry  U.  S.  army,  and  ordered  to 


APPENDIX.  397 

join  his  regiment,  then  stationed  at  Council  Bluffs.  The  route  lay  through 
the  lakes  to  Green  Bay ;  thence  up  the  Fox  River,  and  down  the  Wis- 
consin to  the  Mississippi  River,  thence  across  the  country,  then  a 
wilderness,  to  Council  Bluffs.  On  the  Fox  River,  the  Indians  were  some- 
what troublesome.  One  night,  after  the  party  had  camped,  the  Indians 
gathered  in  large  numbers  about  them  and  commenced  the  war  dance. 
The  men  were  terribly  frightened,  expecting  a  bloody  skirmish,  if  not  a 
general  massacre;  but  Holmes,  taking  a  sergeant  and  file  of  men,  start- 
ed for  their  camp.  He  left  the  men  a  short  distance  in  the  rear,  out  of 
sight,  with  orders  to  come  up  if  any  difficulty  ensued,  and  then  pro- 
ceeded to  the  chief  and  demanded  the  reason  of  their  dancing  the  war 
dance.  The  chief  answered  in  a  insolent  strain,  when  Holmes  caught 
the  chiefs  rifle  and  tried  to  discharge  it.  The  savage  seized  him,  but 
Holmes  discharged  the  rifle,  and  after  a  short  scuffle,  tied  the  savage's 
hands  behind  him,  and  returned  to  his  men  with  his  prisoner.  The 
cowardly  soldiers  had  not  dared  to  show  themselves.  The  Indians 
were  then  informed  that  any  hostile  demonstration  would  be  followed 
by  the  immediate  death  of  their  chief.  There  was  no  more  trouble 
from  the  Indians  on  this  route.  When  crossing  the  country  from  the 
Mississippi  to  the  Missouri  River,  the  party  lost  the  trail,  wandered 
about  until  out  of  provisions,  and  were  compelled  to  eat  their  dogs. 
After  enduring  all  the  hardships  incident  to  such  a  situation,  they  finally 
reached  the  fort  at  Council  Bluffs. 

Lieut.  Holmes  was  stationed  at  Council  Bluffs  for  four  years.  Mean- 
time the  Indians  on  the  Yellow  Stone  were  threatening  hostilities,  and 
Gen.  Atkinson  with  a  body  of  troops  was  sent  up  the  river  to  quiet 
them.  On  this  trip,  Holmes  was  attached  to  the  corps  of  topographical 
engineers,  with  the  command  of  the  artillery.  Having  encountered  a 
large  body  of  hostile  Indians,  Holmes  with  three  others  was  detached  to 
hold  a  talk  with  them.  At  first  unarmed  Indians  met  them  in  council,  but 
soon  armed  Indians  gathered  around,  and  those  unarmed  began  to  drop 
oft'  and  returned  with  their  arms,  until  they  were  surrounded  by  four 
or  five  hundred  well  armed  savages.  The  General  now  learning  their 
situation  immediately  beat  to  arms.  This  made  their  situation  much 
more  critical ;  fs  they  must  either  disobey  the  order  of  their  general 
and  run  the  risk  of  a  massacre  where  they  were,  or  proceed  through  a 
gang  of  armed  hostile  savages  with  no  means  of  defending  themselves 
if  attacked.  Holmes  decided  the  dilemma  instantly  ;  and  in  obedience 
to  orders,  deliberately  arose  and  walked  out  of  the  Council  ring,  not 
a  savage  laying  a  hand  on  him.  He  immediately  headed  his  artillery, 
but  Gen.  Atkinson  gave  orders  for  no  firing,  and  after  a  long  parley. 


398  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBrET, 

finally  concluded  a  treaty  with  them,  thus  consummating  the  object  of 
the  trip  without  bloodshed. 

On  returning  to  Council  Bluffs,  Holmes  was  transferred  to  the  com- 
missary department,  where  he  remained  until  the  Black  Hawk  war  broke 
out,  in  1852,  when  he  obtained  leave  of  absence  and  went  up  the  Missis- 
sippi River  with  the  troops  as  a  volunteer.  Soon  after  his  arrival  in  the 
enemy's  country,  he  was  elected  and  served  as  colonel  of  a  regiment 
of  Illinois  volunteers.  He  was  subsequently  appointed  one  of  Gen. 
Dodge's  aids,  by  whom  he  was  spoken  of  in  the  highest  terms.  Gen. 
Dodge  sent  him  down  the  river  for  supplies  for  the  army,  and  on  his 
return  on  the  steamboat  Warrior,  forty  miles  above  Prairie  Du  Chien, 
the  party  fell  in  with  the  savages,  with  whom  they  had  a  severe  con- 
flict. Holmes  was  the  senior  oSieer,  but  the  troops  were  under  the 
immediate  command  of  Lieut.  Kingsbury.  Their  little  force,  consisting 
of  fifteen  soldiers,  six  volunteers,  three  passengers,  two  discharged  sol- 
diers and  the  crew  of  the  steamboat,  had  to  contend  with  at  least  three 
hundred  Indians.  After  the  Indians  had  had  twenty-five  killed  and 
more  than  fifty  wounded,  they  retreated.  The  battle  lasted  two  hours. 
Gen.  Atkinson,  in  his  oflicial  despatch  to  Gen.  Scott,  made  honorable 
mention  of  Holmes  for  his  conduct  in  the  aft'air. 

On  his  return  from  this  expedition,  Holmes  was  immediately  promo- 
ted to  a  captaincy  in  the  dragoon  service,  when  he  went  to  Louisville, 
opened  a  recruiting  office,  and  raised  a  company  of  dragoons. 
While  in  Louisville,  he  was  attacked  with  cholera,  but  after  a  partial 
recovery,  he  took  his  company  to  Jeff'erson  Barracks,  ten  miles  from  St. 
Louis.     Here  he  had  a  relapse,  and  died  Nov.  4th,  1833. 

Capt.  Holmes  was  a  man  of  undoubted  genius  ;  bold,  enterprising  and 
chivalrously  brave.  Had  he  lived,  he  would  have  acquired  a  brilliant 
reputation.  He  was  buried  in  St.  Louis,  "and  there  awaits  the  last 
review."     A  monument  was  erected  by  his  "companions  in  arras." 

REV.  SAMUEL  HOPKINS 

Was  the  fifth  son  of  John  Hopkins,  the  miller,  and  was  born  in  1693. 
He  was  graduated  at  Yale  College,  in  1718,  and  was  ordained  at  West 
Springfield,  Mass.,  June  1,  1720,  being  the  second  minister  of  that 
town.  His  wife  was  Esther  Edwards,  a  sister  of  President  Edwards,  a 
woman  of  superior  intellect  and  great  moral  excellence,  whom  he 
married,  June  28,  1727,  and  by  whom  he  had  four  children.  One  of 
these  was  Dr.  Samuel  Hopkins,  a  distinguished  clergyman,  who  was  the 
minister  of  Hadloy  from  1755  to  1811.     A  daughter,  Hannah,  married 


I 


APPENDIX.  399 

Jan.  10,  1759,  John  Worthington,  LL.  D.,  an  eminent  lawyer  of 
Springfield.  Their  daughter  married  Fisher  Ames,  the  orator  and 
statesman. 

Mr.  Hopkins  is  spoken  of  as  a  prudent,  benevolent,  devout  man  and 
faithful  minister.  Dr.  Sprague  says  of  him,  in  his  Annals  of  the 
American  Pulpit,  "  I  have  read  Mr.  Hopkins'  diary,  as  well  as  a  number 
of  his  manuscript  sermons ;  and  have  conversed  with  several  persons 
whose  early  years  were  spent  under  his  ministry  ;  and  from  all  I  have 
been  able  to  gather,  I  conclude  he  must  have  been  a  man  of  excellent 
judgment;  of  fine  moral  qualities;  an  evangelical  and  instructive,  but 
not  very  popular  preacher  ;  a  faithful  pastor  ;  and  held  in  high  estima- 
tion by  his  brethren  in  the  ministry,  and  by  the  community  at  large." 
He  must  have  been  an  industrious  man,  for  it  is  said  he  wrote  1500 
sermons.  In  1753,  he  published  a  small,  but  interesting  and  valuable 
book,  entitled  "  Historical  Memoirs  relating  to  the  Housatunnuk  Indi- 
ans ;  or  an  account  of  the  methods  used  for  the  propagation  of  the 
Gospel  among  that  heathenish  tribe  under  the  ministry  of  the  Rev.  John 
Sergeant,"  <fec.,  (fee.  These  Indians  were  Mohegans,  and  resided  in  the 
Housatonic  Valley,  chiefly  at  Stockbridge. 

SAMUEL  HOPKINS,  D.  D. 

"Was  the  eldest  son  of  Timothy  and  Mary  (Judd)  Hopkins,  and  was  born 
on  the  old  Hopkins'  place,  Sept.  17,  1721.  Coming  of  good  stock  on  both 
sides,  it  behooved  him  to  give  a  good  account  of  himself.  He  did  not  dis- 
appoint expectation.  In  his  Autobiography,  he  congratulated  himself  for 
having  been  born  of  Christian  parents  and  that  his  ancestors,  on  both 
sides,  had  "  been  professors  of  religion,  without  interruption,  during  the 
course  of  two  hundred  years  or  more  ;  and  many  of  them,  if  not  all, 
real  Christians^  At  the  time  of  his  birth,  his  father  determined  to  give 
him  a  public  education,  and  to  make  a  minister  or  Sabbath-day  man  of 
him,  he  being  born  on  the  Sabbath.  Of  himself,  in  childhood,  he  re- 
marks in  his  Autobiography  : 

I  have  considered  it  a  great  ftivor  of  God  that  I  was  born  and  educated  in  a 
religious  family,  and  among  a  people  in  a  country  town,  where  a  regard  to  reli- 
gion and  morality  was  common  and  prevalent,  and  the  education  of  children  and 
youth  was  generally  practiced  in  such  a  degree  that  young  people  were  generally 
orderly  in  their  behavior,  and  abstained  from  those  open  vices  which  were  then 
too  common  in  seaport  and  populous  places.  I  do  not  recollect  that  I  ever  heard 
a  profane  word  from  the  children  and  youth  with  whom  I  was  conversant,  while  I 
lived  with  my  parents,  which  was  till  I  was  in  my  fifteenth  year.*     I   from  my 

*  I  suspect  he  did  not  associate  much  with  the  boys  of  the  village  ;  or,  that  the  boys  of  that 
day  were  a  good  deal  better  than  the  generations  which  followed  them. 


400  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 

youth  was  not  volatile  and  wild,  but  rather  of  a  sober  and  steady  make,  and  was 
not  guilty  of  external  irregularities,  such  as  disobedience  to  parents,  profanation  oi 
the  Sabbath,  lying,  foolish  jesting,  quarreling,  passion  and  anger,  or  rash  and 
profane  words,  and  was  disposed  to  be  diligent  and  faithful  in  whatever  business  I 
was  employed ;  so  that  as  I  advanced  in  age,  I  gained  the  notice,  esteem  and 
respect  of  the  neighborhood. 

At  an  early  period  of  his  life,  young  Hopkins  manifested  no  particu- 
lar inclination  for  study.  He  worked  on  his  father's  farm,  liked  the  oc- 
cupation, made  proficiency  and  was  contented.  At  the  age  of  fourteen, 
however,  his  mind  underwent  some  change.  Farm  work  became  less 
attractive,  and  learning  more  so.  His  father  perceived  this,  encouraged 
him  to  study,  and  told  him  he  might  go  to  college.  He  was  put  under 
the  care  of  the  Rev.  John  Graham  of  Woodbury,  and  in  September, 
1737,  was  examined  and  admitted  a  member  of  Yale  College.  While 
thus  connected  he  made  a  public  profession  of  religiou  in  Waterbury, 
and  embraced  the  Calvinistic  doctrines.  He  led  a  retired,  sober  and 
studious  life,  and  had  the  name  of  being,  in  his  own  language,  ''  a  better 
scholar  than  the  bigger  half  of  the  members."  According  to  President 
Stiles,  he  was  "  a  good  classical  scholar,  well  versed  in  logic,  metaphys- 
ics and  ethics,  and  in  rhetoric  and  oratory."  In  a  word,  "he  was  a  man 
of  splendor !"  Logic  was  the  most  important  college  study  in  those 
days,  and  in  this  Hopkins  particularly  excelled. 

While  Mr.  Hopkins  was  a  member  of  college,  Mr.  Whitfield  appear- 
ed in  New  Haven,  and  in  October,  1740,  preached  to  crowded  assem- 
blies. Hopkins*  heard  him  "and  was  somewhat  impressed,"  and  "jus- 
tified him  with  those  who  were  disposed  to  condemn  him."  The  next 
spring,  Gilbert  Tennant,  the  famous  itinerant,  made  his  appearance 
and  stayed  about  a  week,  preaching  seventeen  sermons.  He  was,  says 
Hopkins  in  his  Autobiography,  "  a  remarkably  plain  and  rousing  preach- 
er," "and  every  person  in  the  college  appeared  to  be  under  a  degree  of 
awakening  and  conviction."  Hopkins  admired  his  preaching,  thought 
him  the  greatest  and  best  man  he  had  ever  seen  or  heard,  and  deter- 
mined, when  he  should  leave  college,  to  go  and  live  with  Lira  wherever 
he  might  be  found.  But,  on  the  seventeenth  day  of  September,  just  be- 
fore he  was  to  take  his  degree,  Jonathan  Edwards,  of  Northampton, 
(whose  sister  his  uncle  Samuel  had  married,)  visited  New  Haven,  and 
preached  his  celebrated  sermon  on  The  Trial  of  the  Spirits.  The  young 
man  heard  it,  and  such  was  the  effect  upon  him,  that  he  changed  his 
mind  in  respect  to  Mr.  Tennant,  and  resolved  to  go  and  reside  with  Mr. 
Edwards  when  he  should  have  an  opportunity. 


Autobiography. 


APPENDIX.  401 

Immediately  after  leaving  college,  Mr.  Iloplvins  returned  to  his  father's 
in  Waterbury,  gloomy  and  dejected  in  mind,  and  lived  a  recluse. 
He  considered  himself  a  sinful  and  lost  creature,  and  spent  many  days 
in  fasting  and  prayer.  In  December,  (1741,)  being  furnished  with  a 
horse,  he  set  out  for  Northampton,  "  an  utter  stranger,"  with  a  view  to 
live  with  Mr.  Edwards.  Mrs.  E.,  in  the  absence  of  her  husband,  receiv- 
ed him  kindly,  and  encouraged  him  to  think  he  could  spend  the  winter 
with  them.  Here,  after  a  period  of  despondency,  his  views  became 
clearer  and  more  satisfactory.  He  pursued  his  theological  studies,  and 
after  a  period  of  four  months,  returned  to  his  father's,  and  received, 
April  29,  1742,  "  a  permit  to  go  forth  and  preach  the  gospel."  He 
preached  a  few  times  in  Waterbury  and  adjacent  towns,  and  returned 
once  more  to  Northampton.  Here,  he  continued  his  theological  studies 
witli  Mr.  Edwards,  and  preached  for  him  occasionally.  Sometimes,  he 
officiated  in  neighboring  pulpits,  once  in  Westfield.  He  spent,  this 
time,  over  three  months  with  Mr.  Edwards,  having  the  benefit  of  the 
instructions  of  the  greatest  metaphysician  of  America. 

In  the  fall  of  1742,  Mr.  Hopkins  supplied  Mr.  Bellamy's  puljiit.  in 
Bethlem,  for  several  sabbaths,  while  the  latter  took  a  "preaching  tour" 
as  fcir  as  Philadelphia.  In  December,  he  accepted  an  invitation  to  preach 
in  Simsbury,  where  he  continued  till  May,  1743.  The  last  of  May  he  was 
again  in  Northampton,  where  he  opened  a  school,  and  at  the  same 
time  prosecuted  his  studies.  But  in  four  weeks  he  was  seized  with  a 
rheumatic  aiiection,  and  felt  compelled  to  change  his  residence.  In  June, 
he  began,  on  invitation,  to  labor  at  Housatonnoc,  tlien  a  parish  of  Sheffield, 
afterwards  (17G1)  incorporated  as  a  town,  with  the  name  of  Great  Barring- 
ton.  In  August,  he  had  the  fever  and  ague,  and  the  pains  made  him 
think  of  the  "  everlasting  pains."  He  was  invited  to  settle,  being  offered  £60, 
lawful  money,  settlement,  and  £35  salary,  for  the  first  year,  and  an  annual 
increase  of  £l  each  year,  till  he  received  £45,*  He  accepted  the  offer  in 
November,  and  was  ordained  December  28,  1743.  His  parish  then 
contained  but  thirty  families,  several  of  them  Dutch,  and  was  situated  on 
the  frontiers  of  civilization — not  a  very  inviting  field,  one  would  think, 
for  the  display  of  the  kind  of  talent  which  Samuel  Hopkins  possessed. 

Soon  after  Mr.  Hopkins'  ordination,  (1744,)  a  French  and  Indian  war 
broke  out,  and  the  western  frontier  towns  were  kept  in  a  state  of  almost 
perpetual    alarm.     He  took  much  interest  in   the  war,  shouldered  his 

*  Prof.  Park,  in  commenting  on  the  smallness  of  these  sums,  and  comparing  them  with  what 
other  ministers  received,  forgets  that  Hopkins  was  paid  in  laicfal  monej',  while  Mr.  Judd  with 
whom  the  comparison  is  made,  and  who  received  £130  per  annum,  (to  be  increased  annually 
£5,)  was  paid  in  old  tenor  [bills],  a  much  depreciated  currency. 

20 


402  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY, 

musket  and  joined  scouting  parties,  in  cases  of  emergency  ;  and  in  his 
correspondence,  sometimes  handled  severely  the  conduct  of  the  govern- 
ment and  the  military.  In  December,  1744,  he  received  the  news  of  the 
violent  illness  of  his  mother.  He  started  for  Waterbury  about  noon, 
and  finished  his  journey  at  bed  time.  His  mother  died  next  day,  Dec. 
5,  1744,  and  was  buried  on  the  day  following.  After  the  funeral,  Mr. 
Leavenworth  preached  a  discourse  on  the  duty  of  resignation  to  God's 
will,  from  2  Kings,  IV,  26.  A  few  days  later,  Dec.  9th,  a  "young 
brother,"  aged  three  weeks,  died.  Four  years  afterwards  the  father  was 
taken  ill,  and  the  son  was  again  summoned  to  his  house  to  witness  the 
closing  scene,  which  happened  Feb.  5,  1749.  Samuel  was  the  executor. 
Upon  him  devolved  the  care  and  education  of  his  three  youngest  brothers, 
James,  Daniel  and  Mark.  The  two  first,  the  father  had  provided  with 
a  farm  and  tools  of  husbandry,  designing  they  should  be  farmers.  But 
they  became  discouraged,  when  their  brother  Samuel  sold  the  farm  and 
undertook  to  educate  the  three,  taking  them  all  to  his  house.  James 
made  great  proficiency  and  entered  Yale  College.  "He  was  a  promis- 
ing young  man,  much  esteemed,  especially  by  his  classmates."  But  be- 
fore the  close  of  his  first  year,  he  sickened  of  a  fever  and  died  in  New 
Haven.  In  three  years  more,  two  sisters,  Hannah  Upson  and  Sarah 
Clark,  were  removed  by  death. 

Mr.  Hopkins  continued  the  minister  of  Great  Barrington,  under  the 
most  aggravated  discouragements,  for  many  years.  The  Indian  wars, 
the  smallness  and  poverty  of  his  parish,  his  meagre  support  and  the  op- 
position he  met  with,  would  have  made  almost  any  other  man  discon- 
tented. His  high  toned  Calvinism  was  distasteful  to  many.  He  oppos- 
ed the  "half  way  covenant "  system,  and  gave  offense  by  the  terras  of 
church  communion  which  he  enforced.  Many  "  unconverted  "  persons, 
particularly  among  the  Dutch,  wanted  their  children  baptized  ;  and 
when  he  refused  to  administer  the  rite,  an  Episcopal  minister  was  invit- 
ed to  do  it,  and  an  Episcopal  society  was  established.  Wben  the  troubles 
with  the  mother  country  commenced,  he  espoused  the  cause  of  the 
colonists  and  became  a  warm  Whig.  His  course  was  viewed  with  disap- 
probation by  the  Tories,  who  were  numerous  in  the  town  and  some- 
times in  a  majority.  They  threatened  to  stop  his  salary,  and  if  possiblt, 
to  drive  him  out  of  town.  His  church  adhered  to  him,  and  adopted 
various  expedients,  without  success,  to  raise  his  salary.  At  length,  as 
his  usefulness  seemed  to  be  at  an  end,  they  united  with  him  in 
calling  a  council  to  decide  the  question  of  his  continuance  among  them. 
A  decision  was  made,  and  the  connection  which  had  lasted  twenty-five 
years  between  a  desponding  pastor  and  an  afflicted  people  was  dissolved, 


APrENDix.  403 

Jan.  ]8,  17G9.  Long  afterwards,  on  looking  back  to  the  distracted  con- 
dition in  which  his  parish  was  left — their  divisions  and  destitution  for 
many  years — he  feared  he  did  wrong  to  leave  them.  He  might,  he  said, 
have  given  up  study  and  supported  himself  by  laboring  on  his  farm,  and 
at  the  same  time,  preached  to  his  people,  "  after  a  sort,"  without  com- 
pensation. Nothing  better  illustrates  the  simplicity  of  his  character,  his 
honesty  and  self-denying  nature,  than  these  reflections.  At  this  dis- 
tance of  time  and  place,  it  would  seem  obvious  enough  that  the  evils 
which  Hopkins  deplored  were  not  of  a  sort  to  be  removed  by  his  minis- 
trations. 

Our  theologian  was  not  fortunate  in  his  early  matrimonial  enterprises. 
An  engagement  which  he  formed  at  Northampton  was  broken  off  "  with- 
out any  fault  of  his."  Another,  made  in  Great  Barrington,  terminated 
in  the  same  way,  the  young  laJy,  "  rather  of  a  belle"  in  the  place,  and 
of  a  bright  intellect,  preferring,  at  the  critical  time,  another  lover.  This, 
he  said,  "  was  a  trial,  a  very  great  trial  ;"  but  he  was,  as  usual,  resigned. 
At  length,  however,  he  conquered  adversity,  and  married,  Jan.  13,  1748, 
Joanna,  daughter  of  Moses  Ingersoll  of  Great  Barrington.  She  is  de- 
scribed as  delicate  in  her  person,  sprightly,  intelligent,  of  much  decision 
of  character;  but  of  a  consumptive  tendency  and  a  great  sufferer  from 
ill  health  after  marriage.  About  1786,  she  was  afflicted  with  temporary 
insanity,  and  died  Aug.  21,  179."J,  aged  67.  She  was  the  mother  of 
eight  children,  all  born  in  Great  Barrington.  The  eldest  son  was  Gen- 
eral David  Hopkins,  an  influential  and  wealthy  man  who  lived  near 
Baltimore,  Md.,  and  died  leaving  several  children.  The  second  son, 
Moses,  was  a  magistrate  and  farmer  in  Great  Barrington,  eminent  for 
his  strength  of  mind  and  sterling  virtue.  He  was  County  register,  and 
died  at  the  age  of  84,  having  had  nine  children.  The  third,  Levi,  lived 
and  died  in  Virginia,  leaving  six  children.  The  fourth,  Samuel,  was  a 
thrifty  farmer,  resided  on  the  homestead  in  Great  Barrington,  and  left 
three  children.  The  fifth,  Daniel,  died  in  Maryland,  in  1788,  aged  24. 
The  eldest  daughter,  Elizabeth,  was  an  accomplished  lady,  married  Dr. 
John  Sibley,  an  eminent  surgeon  in  the  Revolutionary  army,  and  died 
at  Fayetteville,  N.  C,  in  1790,  leaving  two  sons.  The  second,  was  Mrs. 
Joanna  Fisher  of  Medway,  Mass.,  who  died  in  1786,  leaving  one  daugh- 
ter. The  third,  Rhoda,  married  Capt.  John  Anthony  of  Newport,  and 
died  1792,  aged  2\),  leaving  one  child. 

Mr.  Hopkins'  second  wife  was  Elizabeth  West,  piincipal  of  a  celebra- 
ted boarding  school  for  females  in  Newport,  a  woman  of  rare  endow- 
ments, to  whom  he  was  married,  Sept.  14,  1794.  She  died  in  Taunton, 
Mass.,  April  9,  1814,  aged  75. 


401  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBURT. 

After  Mr.  Hopkins'  dismission,  he  preaclied  for  a  time  in  Canaan, 
distant  twelve  miles,  while  he  spent  the  week  days  at  home,  preparing 
a  hook  for  publication.  In  the  April  and  May  which  followed,  (1769,) 
he  officiated  several  sabbaths  at  the  Old  South  church,  Boston.  Thence 
he  was  invited  to  go  to  Topsham,  Maine,  where  he  preached  till  July,  and 
was  requested  to  remain  longer ;  but  concluded  to  accept  an  invitation 
to  go  to  Newport,  R.  I.,  where  he  arrived,  July  21st.  De  preached  five 
sabbaths,  and  by  a  major  vote  received  a  call  to  settle  over  the  First 
Congregational  church  and  society.  He  then  went  home  to  ponder 
and  decide  the  question ;  and  after  several  weeks  returned,  determined 
to  accept.  But  the  people  had  changed  their  minds,  owing  partly  to 
"  a  sarcastic  pamphlet,"  which  had  been  circulated  against  him,  in  his 
absence.  A  committee  of  the  church  requested  him  to  withhold  his 
answer  till  the  opposition  should  subside.  A  meeting  of  the  congrega- 
tion was  held,  and  a  vote  was  passed  (thirty-six  to  thirty-three)  that 
they  did  not  want  his  services.  He  was  again  resigned,  and  made  pre- 
parations to  leave.  On  the  18th  day  of  March,  1770,  he  preached  his 
farewell  discourse.  This  wrought  a  change.  His  enemies  were  subdued 
— adversity  was  once  more  conquered.  "It  is  all  wonderful,"  he  writes 
in  his  journal.  "  The  walls  of  Jerico  are  fallen  down  by  the  blowing  of 
ram's  horns."  The  congregation  again  met,  and  the  call  was  renewed 
by  an  almost  unanimous  vote — such  was  the  eftect,  under  favoring  cir- 
cumstances, of  the  simple,  homely  eloquence  of  Samuel  Hopkins.  He 
was  installed,  April  11,  1770,  Dr.  (afterwards  President)  Stiles  preach- 
ing the  installation  sermon.  His  congregation  then  consisted  of  135 
families,  and  his  church  of  70  members,  20  of  them  males. 

Newport,  at  the  time  of  Mr.  Hopkins'  settlement,  was,  in  the  numbers 
of  its  people,  the  second  town  in  New  England,  and  more  populous  than 
it  is  now.  It  was  a  place  of  wealth,  fashion  and  refinement,  where  the 
rough  strength  of  Hopkins,  one  would  suppose,  could  hardly  make 
amends  for  his  unattractive  manner.  He,  however,  spent  several  years 
there  in  successful  and  pleasant  labor.  It  was  "  the  sunniest  period  of 
his  ministerial  life."  At  length,  however,  the  Revolution  came.  The 
British  troops,  under  Gen.  Clinton  and  Lord  Percy,  took  possession  of 
the  town,  in  Dec.  1776,  Hopkins  remained  till  the  last  moment  and 
then  fled.  He  had  two  years  before  sent  his  family  to  Great  Barring- 
ton.  The  four  years  which  followed,  he  labored  in  Massachusetts  and 
Connecticut.  He  spent  the  summer  of  1777  in  Newburyport,  preach- 
ing to  the  Federal  Street  congregation.  In  the  winter  of  1777-8,  he 
was  in  Canterbury,  Conn.;  in  the  spring  and  summer  of  1778  in  Stam- 


ArPENDix.  405 

ford;  and  afterwards  till  the  spring  of  IVSO,  in  North  Stamford,  then  a 
missionary  field. 

Mr.  Hopkins  returned  to  Newport,  now  a  scene  of  desolation,  in  the 
spring  of  1780.  His  meeting  house  had  been  used  as  a  barrack  and 
hospital  by  the  invaders.  The  pulpit  and  pews  had  been  broken  up, 
the  windows  demolished  and  the  bell  carried  oif.  His  congregation  was 
scattered.  Those  that  were  left  were  a  mere  handful  and  much  impov- 
erished ;  and  yet,  he  resolved  to  remain  without  a  hope  of  a  salary.  He 
preached  first  in  a  private  house,  and  then  in  the  Sabbatarian  meeting 
house.  Soon  he  received  a  call  to  settle  in  Middleborough,  Mass.,  with 
the  promise  of  a  handsome  support,  but  he  declined  to  go.  He  prefer- 
red to  labor  in  penury  with  his  dear  people.  His  congregation  did  not 
become  again  prosperous.     He  died  poor. 

In  1790,  the  degree  of  Doctor  of  Divinity  was  conferred  on  Mr.  Hop- 
kins by  Brown  University.  On  the  10th  of  January,  1799,  he  had  a 
paralytic  attack  of  the  right  side,  which  affected  his  speech,  but  did  not 
seem  to  disturb  his  mental  faculties.  He  so  far  recovered  as  to  be  able 
to  resume  his  labors.  His  last  sermon  was  preached  Oct.  16th,  1803, 
during  a  revival  in  his  congregation.  After  its  delivery  and  his  return 
to  his  dwelling,  he  remarked,  with  a  wearied  look,  to  his  granddaughter, 
"  Now  I  have  done  ;  I  can  preach  no  more."  Soon  afterwards,  he  was 
seized  with  an  apoplectic  fit.  Consciousness  returned  in  a  few  hours,  but 
he  gradually  sunk  and  died,  December  20th,  1803.  Dr.  Levi  Hart  of 
Preston,  Conn.,  according  to  a  previous  agreement  with  the  deceased, 
preached  the  funeral  sermon,  which  was  published. 

Dr.  Hopkins'  first  published  work  was  in  l7o9.  It  was  a  pamphlet, 
and  entitled — "Sin,  through  Divine  Interposition,  an  advantage  to  the 
Universe,  and  yet  this  no  Excuse  for  Sin  or  Encouragement  to  it;  illus- 
trated and  proved ;  and  God's  Wisdom  and  Holiness  in  the  Permission 
of  Sin ;  and  that  his  Will  herein  is  the  same  as  his  revealed  Will, 
shown  and  confirmed  ;  in  three  Sermons,  from  Rom.  Ill,  5,  6,  7,  8. 
By  Samuel  Hopkins,  A.  M.,  Minister  of  the  Gospel  at  Sheffield."  These 
sermons  were  reprinted  in  Boston  in  1773,  and  about  the  same  time,  in 
Edinburgh,  Scotland.  They  awakened  much  opposition.  Some  were 
so  shocked  at  the  title  that  they  refused  to  read  beyond  it.  No  public 
attempt  was  made  to  refute  the  doctrines  maintained. 

Our  author's  next  volume  was  controversial,  the  first  of  that  charac- 
ter, published  in  1765,  and  entided — "An  inquiry  concerning  the  Prom- 
ises of  the  Gospel  ;  whether  any  of  them  are  made  to  the  Exercises  and 
Doings  of  Persons  in  an  unregenerate  state ;  containing  Remarks  on 
two  Sermons  published  by  Dr.  Mayhew,  of  Boston."     Mr.  Mills  of  Rip- 


406  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKT. 

ton,  Conn.,  attempted  an  answer  to  the  "  Inquiry,"  in  1*767,  in  reply  to 
which  Hopkins  wrote  his  celebrated  book  of  one  hundred  and  eighty- 
four  pages,  octavo,  entitled,  "The  true  State  and  character  of  the  Unre- 
geneiate,  stripped  of  all  Misrepresentation  and  Di?guise  :  printed  at 
New  Haven,  1769."  Mills  was  eftectually  silenced.  Afterwards  Rev. 
William  Hart*  entered  into  the  controversy,  and  Hopkins  answered  him 
in  "  Animadversions  on  Mr.  Hart's  late  Dialogue  ;  in  a  letter  to  a  Friend  :" 
New  London,  1770.  In  1773,  he  published  a  book  which  he  called 
"  An  Inquiry  into  the  Nature  of  True  Holiness,  with  an  Appendix.  Con- 
taining an  Answer  to  the  Rev.  William  Hart's  Remarks,"  &c. 

Dr.  Hopkins  published  several  other  theological  works ;  but  the  most 
important  of  them  was  a  system  of  divinity,  entitled,  "System  of  Doc- 
trines contained  in  Divine  Revelation,  explained  and  defended  ;  showing 
their  Consistence  and  Connection  with  each  other.  To  which  is  added  a 
Treatise  on  the  Millennium."  On  this  work,  in  two  large  octavo  volumes, 
the  author  spent  more  than  ten  years.  He  was  seventy-two  years  old 
when  it  was  published.  It  is  regarded  as  one  of  the  ablest  treatises  in 
the  language. 

Besides  his  theological  works.  Dr.  Hopkins  published  a  memoir  of  his 
friend  and  instructor,  Jonathan  Edwards.  He  also,  at  the  request  of 
the  family,  prepared  himself  by  six  years  study  of  the  manuscripts  to 
edit  Edwards'  works.  He  succeeded  in  getting  through  the  press  one 
small  volume  containing  the  two  dissertations  "Concerning  the  End  for 
which  God  created  the  World,"  and  the  "  Nature  of  True  Virtue,"  with 
a  preface  by  the  editor.  The  enterprise  was  then  abandoned  for  the  want 
of  encouragement. 

Dr.  Hopkins  was  an  active  and  practical  philanthropist.  He  was  one 
of  the  earliest  opposers  of  the  African  slave  trade  and  of  African  slave- 
ry, in  this  country.  He  devoted  himself  to  the  work  of  elevating  the 
black  race  with  unwearied  devotion,  and  continued  his  efforts  till  the 
infirmities  of  age  obliged  him  to  desist.  They  who  had  been  the  objects 
of  his  solicitude,  testified  their  gratitude  by  attending  his  funeral  in 
large  numbers. 

Edwards,  Hopkins  and  Bellamy — the  New  England  triumvirate — were 
the  great  theologians  of  their  day  and  country.  They  represented  Ameri- 
can Calvinism.  If  Hopkins  was  not  the  greatest,  he  certainly  was  not  the 
least  of  the  three.  For  close  reasoning  and  sturdy  strength,  for  deep  views 
and  keen  analysis,  he  had  few  superiors.  He  was  a  bold,  adroit  man, 
who,  with  masterly  logic,  pursued  investigations  to  their  results.     He 

*  Mr.  Hart  is  stated  to  have  been  the  first  who  applied  the  term  Uopliinsian  or  Ilopkintonian, 
to  Mr.  Hopkins'  Theology, 


APPENDIX.  407 

was  an  unflinching  Calvinist.  He  has  been  called  hyper- Calvinistic,  be- 
cause he  was  more  consistent  and  more  fearless  than  some  of  his  class. 
He  was  not  afraid  to  carry  principles  out  and  encounter  the  consequences. 
If  two  distinct  trains  of  consecutive  thought,  in  which  he  could  see 
no  logical  defects,  came  in  conflict  and  threatened  mutual  annihilation, 
he  was  not  affrighted.  He  reviewed  the  arguments,  examined  critically 
each  link  in  the  chain,  and  if  he  could  see  no  imperfection — no  want  of 
logical  sequence — he  adopted  the  conclusions  and  stated  them  boldly. 
With  consequences  and  seeming  contradictions,  he  conceived  he  had 
nothing  to  do.  The  Calvinistic  doctrine  of  olivine  sovereignty,  he  be- 
lieved in  its  fullest  extent.  He  adopted  it  as  a  metaphysical  principle, 
and  put  it  into  his  logic  mill.  Whatever  came  out  was  truth.  It  did 
not  avail  to  tell  him  he  destroyed  human  liberty.  He  affirmed  the  free- 
dom of  the  will  on  different  grounds,  and  left  others  to  reconcile  the 
conflicting  dogmas. 

Dr.  Hopkins  did  not  trim  his  words.  He  was  not  skilled  in  the  use 
of  oily  phrases.  He  had  a  direct  way  of  stating  his  conclusions.  The 
truth  he  liked  to  present  naked,  even  though  repulsive  in  its  features. 
His  honesty  would  not  permit  him  to  use  ornament.  Hence,  he  was 
accounted  blunt,  severe;  his  doctrines  stern  and  harsh.  His  reasonings 
led  him  to  the  conclusion  that  a  Christian  ought  to  be  willing  to  be 
damned,  if  thereby  the  glory  of  God  would  best  be  promoted  ;  and  he 
was  intrepid  enough  to  say  so.  In  his  work  on  Future  Punishment,  he 
says  of  the  wicked — "  The  smoke  of  their  torment  shall  ascend  up  in 
the  sight  of  the  blessed  for  ever  and  ever ;  and  serve  as  a  most  clear 
glass,  always  before  the  eyes,  to  give  them  a  constant,  bright,  and  most 
affecting  view  of  all  these.  xVnd  all  this  display  of  the  divine  character 
and  glory  will  be  in  favor  of  the  redeemed,  and  most  entertaining,  and 
give  the  highest  pleasure  to  all  who  love  God,  and  raise  tlieir  happiness 
to  ineffable  heights,  whose  felicity  consists,  summarily,  in  the  knowledge 
and  enjoyment  of  God."  The  sentiment  expressed  in  this  passage  is 
not  new.  It  is  a  part  of  old  fashioned  Calvinism  ;  but  the  language  is 
original.  Nobody  but  Hopkins  would  have  thought  of  the  word  "  en- 
tertained." But  with  him,  it  was  the  word,  and  he  dared  to  use  it.  He 
thus  excited  prejudices.  Caricature  prints  were  got  up  representing  him 
as  being  "  entertained "  by  the  woes  of  the  damned.  Ridicule  and 
obloquy  he  heeded  not.     Denunciation  did  not  disturb  him. 

Though  plain  spoken  and  uncompromising,  Dr.  Hopkins  was  an  in- 
offensive man.  He  had  no  guile  in  his  heart.  Simple  minded  and  affec- 
tionate, his  whole  life  was  spent  in  self-denying  labors  for  the  good  of 
others.  No  man  had  more  of  the  milk  of  human  kindness  in  him.  No 
m:;in  was  more  unselfish  in  whatever  he  did. 


403  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 

Dr.  Hopkins  was  a  hard  student  of  theology  and  metaphysics,  but  no 
rhetorician.  He  never  learned  the  graces  of  style — never  acquired  a  full 
knowledge  of  his  mother  tongue.  His  language  was  forcible,  some- 
times pithy;  but  his  words  were  often  badly  chosen,  and  generally 
clumsily  arranged.  As  a  preacher,  he  was  the  most  uninteresting  of 
men.  His  tones  were  drawling  and  monotonous,  his  voice  sometimes 
resembling  a  cracked  bell.  His  pronunciation  was  ungraceful  and  in- 
accurate, and  his  manner  ungainly.  The  children  were  sometimes 
frightened  by  his  appearance,  . 

In  his  person,  Dr.  Hopkins  was  more  than  six  feet  high,  erect,  with  a 
large  chest,  broad  face,  capacious  forehead  and  gigantic  proportions  gen- 
erally. He  wore  a  white,  full  bottomed,  powdered  wig,  a  three  cornered 
hat,  and  silver  knee  buckles  and  shoe  buckles.  His  manner  was  awkward, 
but  his  figure  was  on  the  whole  so  commanding,  that  "strangers,  pre 
suming  he  was  a  great  man,  would  at  once  take  off  their  hats  when 
they  met  him."  In  early  life,  he  was  distinguished  for  his  agility  and 
athletic  feats. 

In  1853,  an  edition  of  Dr.  Hopkins'  works  was  published  by  the 
American  Doctrinal  Tract  Society,  in  three  volumes,  with  an  interesting- 
memoir  by  Professor  Park.  To  this  meaioir  and  to  Dr.  Hopkins'  auto- 
biography and  works  I  am  mainly  indebted  for  the  materials  of  this 
sketch.  By  the  way,  the  genealogy  of  the  Waterbury  branch  of  the 
Hopkins  family,  contained  in  that  memoir,  was  furnished  by  the  author 
of  this  volume. 

DANIEL  HOPKINS,  D.  D., 

A  younger  brother  of  the  preceding,  was  born  Oct.  16,  1*734.  He  pur- 
sued his  preparatory  studies  with  his  brother  Samuel,  and  entered  Yale 
College  in  1754.  During  his  college  course,  he  was  much  distinguished 
as  a  scholar,  and  graduated  in  1758  with  the  highest  honors  of  his 
class.  His  theological  studies  were  pursued  under  the  direction  of  his 
brother,  whose  distinctive  views  he  adopted  and  afterwards  earnestly 
inculcated.      He  was  licensed  to  preach  by  the  New  Haven  Association, 

Soon  after  receiving  his  license,  he  went  to  Halifax,  Nova  Scotia,  be- 
ing recommended  to  a  vacant  parish  there  by  President  Clap  of  Yale 
College.  He  preached  with  acceptance  till  his  health  broke  down, 
when  he  was  obliged  to  intermit  his  ministerial  duties  for  eight  years, 
during  which  time  he  was  occupied  in  traveling  and  manual  labor, 
preaching  occasionally  when  his  strength  allowed. 

In  1766,  he  was  invited  to  preach  to  the  Third  Congregational 
society  of  Salem,  Mass.,  the  former  pastor,  Rev.  John  Huntington,  having 


APPENDIX.  409 

recently  deceased.  "The  doctrines  he  preached,  and  the  plain,  direct, 
and  pungent  manner  in  which  he  preached  them,  procured  for  him 
warm  friends  and  bitter  enemies.  Such  was  the  opposition  awakened 
against  him,  that  a  committee,  consisting  of  some  of  the  most  influential 
men  in  the  town,  waited  upon  him  at  his  residence,  and  made  a  formal 
and  earnest  request,  that  for  the  peace  of  the  community,  he  would 
leave  the  town.  ^Yith  characteristic  shrewdness  he  closed  his  eyes, 
smoothed  down  his  face,  and  mildiy  said, — '  Gentlemen,  I  smoke  my 
own  tobacco.'  The  committee  withdrew  and  gave  him  no  further 
trouble."*  He  continued  to  preach  for  eight  years  before  he  became 
the  settled  pastor.  During  this  period,  he  spent  a  portion  of  his  time 
in  the  instruction  of  youth.  Often,  he  preached  in  the  neighboring 
vacant  parishes  in  Essex  county ;  and  from  Hamilton,  received  a  call  to 
settle  in  tire  ministry,  which  he  declined  on  account  of  delicate  health. 

Mr.  Hopkins  interested  himself  in  the  early  struggles  of  the  colonies 
for  independence,  and  was  chosen  a  member  of  the  Provincial  Congress 
in  17V5.  His  counsels  were  wise  and  patriotic,  and  he  is  said  to  have 
received  some  peculiar  marks  of  confidence  from  General  Washington.f 
In  1778,  "he  was  elected  a  member  of  the  council  of  the  Conventional 
Government,"  and  served  faithfully  and  honorably. 

In  the  mean  time,  a  disruption  took  place  in  the  Third  church.  The 
majority  of  them  went  over  to  Presbyterianism,  while  the  Congrega- 
tional minority,  recognized  by  aa  ecclesiastical  council  as  the  original 
Third  church,  adhered  to  Mr.  Hopkins.  Over  the  latter,  Mr.  H.  was  or- 
dained, Nov.  18,  1778.  He  continued  the  sole  pastor  till  1804,  when  a 
colleague  was  settled  ;  and  died,  after  a  distressing  illness,  Dec.  14,1814. 

The  subject  of  this  notice  was  married  in  1771,  to  Susanna,  daughter 
of  John  Saunders  of  Salem,  by  whom  he  had  six  children,  four  sons  and 
two  daughters.  His  widow  died  March  16,1838.  He  published  two 
sermons  ;  one  on  the  death  of  Washington,  in  1800,  and  one  at  the  ded- 
ication of  the  New  South  meeting  house  in  Salem,  in  1805.  Tlie  de- 
gree of  Doctor  of  Divinity  was  conferred  upon  him  by  Dartmouth  Col- 
lege in  1809. 

Doctor  Hopkins  is  described  as  a  laborious  and  fciilhful  minister,  a  dis- 
criminating and  interesting  preacher,  who  toileil  in  season  and  out  of  sea- 
son for  the  spiritual  good  of  his  flock.     He  had  a  quiet,  peaceable,  affec- 


*  Sprague's  Annals  of  the  American  Pulpit — sketch  by  Brown  Emerson,  D.  D. — Ministers 
in  those  days  generally  raised  their  own  tobacco. 
t  Prof.  Parle's  Memoir  of  Samuel  Hopkins,  p.  56. 


410  IIISTOEY   OF   WATEKBUKY. 

tionate  and  forgiving  spirit.  His  talents  were  of  a  liigli  order.  His  brother 
Samuel  acknowledged  himself  indebted  to  him  for  some  important 
views  and  reasonings  contained  in  his  "  System  of  Divinity."  He  was 
thoroughly  "Hopkinsian"  in  his  opinions  and  preaching;  still,  he  was 
not  an  undiscriminating  follower  of  any  man.  He  is  said  to  have  differed 
from  his  brother  on  "the  subject  of  submission,"  but  chiefly  in  the 
mode  of  explanation. 

In  his  social  intercourse,  Dr.  Hopkins  was  distinguished  by  afiability 
and  courtesy ;  in  conversation  by  originality,  good  sense  and  pleas- 
antry. His  language  was  simple,  pure  and  spicy  ;  rich  in  anecdote  and 
illustration;  so  that  his  company  was  very  generally  sought.  "His  tall 
and  manly  figure,  surmounted  by  a  high  triangular  hat,  gave  such  dig- 
nity and  grace  to  his  movements,  that  no  man  who  walked  the  streets 
was  looked  at  with  more  respect  and  veneration.  The  remark  was  often 
made  that,  in  his  appearance  and  bearing,  he  strikingly  resembled 
Washington."  In  the  latter  part  of  his  life,  he  became  much  interested 
in  benevolent  enterprises.  He  was  a  pioneer  in  the  cause  of  Home  Mis- 
sions ;  took  an  active  part  in  the  formation  of  the  Massachusetts  Mis- 
sionary Society ;  assisted  Dr.  Spring  and  others  in  editing  its  magazine  ; 
was  a  member  of  its  Board  of  Trustees,  and  for  the  two  last  years  of  his 
life,  notwithstanding  his  advanced  age,  performed  the  duties  of  its 
president. 

MARK  HOPKINS. 

He  was  the  youngest  son  of  the  family  of  Timothy  Hopkins,  Esq. 
The  father  at  his  death  (in  1748-9)  committed  him  to  the  care  of  his 
brother  Samuel,  with  the  charge  to  give  him  a  public  education,  for ' 
which  there  was  a  sufficient  estate.  The  brother  took  him  to  his  own 
house  and  fitted  him  for  college,  bestowing  on  him  the  greatest  care. 
After  spending  five  years  in  Great  Harrington,  Mark  entered  Yale  Col- 
lege, where  he  graduated  in  1758,  having  for  his  classmates  his  brother 
Daniel  and  Silas  Deane,  About  1761,  he  commenced  the  practice  of 
law  in  Great  Barrington,  and  resided  a  near  neighbor  of  his  brother 
Samuel.  He  ros(i  quickly  to  eminence  in  his  profession.  He  gave  in- 
struction to  many  law  students,  among  whom  was  the  distinguished 
Theodore  Sedgwick.  In  1765,  he  married  Electa  Sergeant,  the  daughter 
of  Rev.  John  Sergeant,  the  missionary  at  Stockbridge.  When  the  Rev- 
olutionary war  broke  out,  he  became  distinguished  as  a  patriot,  entered 
the  army  and  received  the  commission  of  colonel.  He  was  taken 
sick  at  White  Plains  of  a  typhoid  fever  which  prevailed  there  at  the 
time ;  and    to  prevent  his  falling  into  the  hands  of  the  British  army 


APPENDIX,  411 

wliicli  was  inarching  upon  the  place,  he  was  borne  from  his  sick  bed  in 
the  arms  of  the  soldier  who  attended  him  to  a  place  of  safety,  and  died,  it 
is  thought,  in  consequence  of  the  fatigue  and  excitement,  Oct.  26,  1776, 
aged  37,*  two  days  before  the  memorable  fight  at  While  Plains.  He 
was  much  beloved  and  respected,  and  left  a  family  of  six  children,  the 
eldest  of  whom,  Archibald,  became  the  father  of  President  Mark  Hop- 
kins and  Professor  Albert  Hopkins,  of  Williams  College. 

JOSEPH  HOPKINS 

Was  the  third  son  of  Stephen  and  Susanna  (Peck)  Hopkins,  and  grand- 
son of  John  Hopkins,  the  miller.  He  was  born  in  the  southeast  quar- 
ter, (in  the  limits  of  present  Naugatuck,)  June  6,  1730.  His  father 
was  a  man  of  influence  and  a  frequent  representative  to  the  General 
Court;  and  the  celebrated  Samuel  Hopkins  of  Newport  was  his  first 
cousin.  He  learned  the  silversmith's  trade,  married,  Nov.  28,  1754, 
Hepzibah,  a  daughter  of  Dea.  Thomas  Clark,  and  settled  in  the  town 
center  as  a  silversmith  and  watchmaker.  He  made  plated  knee  buckles 
and  shoe  buckles,  silver  sleeve  buttons  and  other  silver  and  plated  ware. 
A  set  of  silver  vest  buttons,  worn  by  Mr.  AVilliam  Garnsey  of  Water- 
town,  (and  previously  by  his  father,  Mr.  Abijah  Garnsey,)  made  ninety 
years  before  by  Mr.  Hopkins,  was  lately  shown  to  the  editor  of  the  Water- 
bury  American.     They  are  described  in  that  paper. 

Mr.  Hopkins  was  appointed  town  treasurer  in  1758,  and  hold  the 
oflice  six  successive  years.  In  17G2,  he  was  made  a  justice  of  tlie  peace, 
and  was  continued  in  ofKce  till  177G.  In  the  spring  of  1764,  he  was 
chosen  a  representative  to  the  General  Assembly,  and  from  that  period 
till  1796,  was  reelected  forty-four  times,  or  for  nearly  two  thirds  of  the 
sessions.  He  was  an  active  and  earnest  patriot  during  the  war  of  the 
Revolution,  and  for  most  of  the  time  was  a  respected  member  of  the 
lower  house.  In  consequence,  probably,  of  his  knowledge  of  metals,  he 
was  put  at  the  head  of  a  committee,  in  1775,  to  visit  the  lead  mines  of 
New  Canaan,  and  examine  the  quality  of  the  ore,  the  state  of  the 
mines,  &c.  In  1776,  he  was  selected  for  a  similar  service,  the  com- 
mittee being  charged  to  search  for  lead  mines.  (Great,  at  that  time, 
was  the  dearth  of  lead.)  He  was  one  of  those  appointed,  in  17  77,  to 
sign  the  small  bills  for  currency. 

In  the  year  1777,  Mr.  Hopkins  was  appointed  one  of  the  "justices  of 
the  quorum,"  which  post  he  held  till  his  decease.  When  the  Probate 
District  of  Waterbury  was  established,  in  1779,  he  was  made  its  first 

♦  Manuscript  letter  of  President  Hopkins  of  Williams  College. 


412  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBTJET. 

judge,  and  was  continued  in  office  during  his  life.  He  was  also  a  dea- 
con of  the  church,  to  which  office  he  was  chosen,  probably,  about  1780, 
though  there  are  no  known  records  in  existence  which  inform  us  of  the 
exact  date.  He  was  a  man  of  affable  manners,  of  good  intellect  and 
kind  heart.  By  a  mild,  conciliating  and  persuasive  way,  he  sometimes 
subdued  hard-headed  men  when  arguments  were  of  no  avail.  For  more 
than  thirty  years  before  his  death,  he  was  more  widely  and  advantage- 
ously known  than  any  other  man  of  the  town. 

So  numerous  were  Mr.  Ho^Dkins'  public  engagements,  that  he  gave  up 
his  trade  many  years  before  his  death.  He  lived  in  a  house  which 
stood  a  little  in  front  of  that  in  which  Scovill  M.  Buckingham  now  re- 
sides. It  was  built,  it  is  said,  (and  occupied  for  a  time,)  by  Ebenezer 
"Warner,  the  father  of  Justus,  and  was  taken  down  in  1834.  After  Mr. 
Hopkins'  death,  it  was  occupied  successively  by  Rev.  Edward  Porter  and 
Rev.  Luke  Wood.  His  shop  stood  a  little  distance  west,  and  was  erect- 
ed after  an  older  one  was  burnt,  soon  after  the  war.  It  was  removed 
in  1834,  when  C.  C.  Post's  house  w^as  built,  and  now  stands  on  the 
west  side  of  Willow  street,  south  of  William  Brown's.  It  bears  on  the 
map  the  name  of  "  J.  J.  B.  Kingsbury." 

At  the  time  of  Mr.  Hopkins'  death,  the  following  notice  of  him  was 
published  in  a  New  Haven  newspaper  : 

Died  ia  the  city  of  New  Haven,  Coan.,  on  Friday,  March  21,  1801,  of  angina 
pectoris,  Joseph  Hopkins,  Esq.,  senior  assistant  judge  of  the  County  Court  for  the 
County  of  New  Haven,  in  the  7  2d  year  of  his  age.  He  had  attended  the  Court 
during  the  session  until  the  Tuesday  before  his  death,  when,  complaining  of  ill 
health,  he  left  the  bench.  On  Saturday,  the  corpse  was  conveyed  to  Waterbury, 
attended  by  some  of  his  family  and  other  connections,  accompanied  a  part  of  the 
way  by  a  rspectable  procession  composed  of  the  judges  of  the  Court,  the  clergy, 
the  gentlemen  of  the  bar,  the  sheriff  and  other  officers  of  the  Court  and  citizens 
of  New  Haven.  The  procession  stopped  in  front  of  the  court-house,  and  a 
prayer  well  adapted  to  the  occasion  was  made  by  the  Rev.  President  Dwight, 
in  the  presence  of  a  large  collection  of  the  inhabitants,  sympathizing  in 
the  loss  of  a  man  endeared  to  them  by  a  long  course  of  public  service.  Possess- 
ing a  sound  mind  and  honest  heart,  he  faithfully  discharged  to  general  acceptance, 
the  duties  of  a  deacon  in  the  church  of  the  first  society  of  Waterbury,  a  justice  of 
the  peace,  a  representative  in  the  Legislature,  a  judge  of  Probates  of  the  District 
of  "Waterbury,  and  of  assistant  judge  of  the  County  Court  for  about  30  years. — 
From  early  life,  he  adorned  his  course  in  an  exemplary  manner  with  the  profession 
and  practice  of  Christianity. 

JESSE  HOPKINS 

Was  the  third  son  of  Joseph  Hopkins,  and  was  born  May  20,  lV66. 
He  learned  his  father's  trade,  and  in  his  youth  showed  a  versatility  of 


APPENDIX.  413 

talent  beyond  his  years.  "  At  the  age  of  seventeen,  on  the  visit  of  Gen- 
erals Washington  and  La  Fayette,  at  the  residence  of  his  father,  La 
Fayette  was  so  pleased  with  the  youth  that  he  made  him  his  aid  during 
a  series  of  military  operations  in  that  quarter.  His  youth  prevented 
him  from  enlisting  in  the  army,  and  bis  love  of  country  from  accepting 
the  invitation  of  La  Fayette  to  visit  France."* 

He  says  of  himself,  in  a  volume  published  in  1828,  entitled  Patriot's 
Manual,  on  Revolutionary  topics:  "  I  was  in  childhood  at  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Revolutionary  war,  and  at  its  close  had  just  arrived 
at  that  age  which  entitled  me  to  shoulder  my  musket — an  age  alive  to 
all  the  interesting  events  of  the  day.  Being  a  son  of  a  Revolutionary 
patriot  who  was  a  member  of  the  State  Legislature,  I  had  an  opportuni- 
ty of  acquiring  considerable  political  information,  for  many  years,  as 
well  as  inhaling  that  s^jirit  of  patriotism  which  was  characteristic  of  the 
times." 

Mr.  Hopkins  set  up  his  trade  in  Walerbury,  using  his  father's  shop. 
He  made  silver  plated  shoe  buckles  and  other  articles.  About  1*791,  he 
erected  for  himself  the  house  owned  and  occupied  by  the  late  Bennet 
Bronson.  In  Dec.  1V94,  he  married  Betsey,  the  daughter  of  Nathaniel 
Goodwin  of  Hartford,  by  whom  he  had  two  children,  Betsey  and  Sally 
Goodwin.  His  wife  died  Feb.  4,  1Y99.  Business,  somehow,  went  not 
very  prosperously  with  him.  He  left  Waterbury,  and  spent  five  years 
in  the  West  Indies,  engaged  in  speculation.  After  his  return,  "he  mar- 
ried his  cousin,  (a  granddaughter  of  Samuel  Hopkins,  D.  D.,  the  cele- 
brated divine  of  Newport,  R.  I.,)  who  is  still  living  in  Vermont." — 
[Hough,  1854.] 

In  1805,  Mr.  Ilopkihs  was  appointed  the  agent  of  William  Henderson 
of  New  York,  the  owner  of  a  large  tract  of  land  in  the  western  part  of 
Jefterson  County,  N.  Y.  He  removed  thither  and  opened  a  land  office. 
When  the  town  of  Henderson  was  organized  in  1806,  he  was  elected 
supervisor,  and  held  the  office  till  1810.  In  1813,  he  became  County 
judge.  He  engaged  largely  in  speculation,  being  sometimes  fortunate 
and  sometimes  the  contrary.  "  He  erected  a  fine  seat  at  the  head  of 
the  bay,  commanding  a  prospect  of  unrivaled  beauty."  At  length 
he  became  involved  in  pecuniary  difficulties,  and    in    1822,    was   re- 


*  Hough's  History  of  Jefferson  County,  N.  Y.  The  notice  from  which  this  extract  is  taken 
states  that  Hopkins  "  received  a  liberal  education."  I  believe  he  did  not  graduate  at  any  col- 
lege ;  though  he  doubtless  received  a  better  education  than  most  of  the  other  town  boys.  At 
seventeen  years  of  age,  however,  he  was  not  too  young  to  enlist  into  the  army  ;  but  the  war  had 
then  (1783)  closed.  Nor  is  it  understood  what  military  operations  were  carried  on  in  or  about 
Waterbury,  at  any  time  during  the  war.  Washington  and  La  Fayette,  it  is  believed,  were  never 
'n  Waterbury  together. 


414:  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY. 

moved  from  his  agency  by  Henderson,  and  his  improvements  taken  to 
apply  on  liis  liabilities.  Ilis  great  energy  of  character  sustained  him 
through  all  his  reverses,  and  he  died  at  Henderson,  in  the  seventy-first 
year  of  his  age. 

Dr.  Hough  says  of  Mr.  Hopkins,  that  he  "  often  wrote  poetry  with 
much  taste  and  fluency,  several  pieces  of  which  still  exist ;  but  although 
meritorious,  he  never  allowed  them  to  go  beyond  the  sacred  precincts 
of  the  family  circle."  He  published  the  book  already  referred  to — the 
Patriot's  Manual — and,  in  1823,  a  pamphlet  relating  to  his  difficulties 
with  Henderson.     He  complained  of  bad  usage.* 

Dr.  LEMUEL  HOPKINS 

Was  a  son  of  Stephen  and  Dorothy  (Talmadge)  Hopkins,  and  was  born 
in  that  part  of  Waterbury  which  is  now  Naugatuck,  June  19,  1750. 
He  was  the  fourth  in  descent  from  John  Hopkins,  the  miller.  He 
studied  medicine  with  Dr.  Jared  Potter  of  Wallingford,  and  afterwards 
with  Dr.  Seth  Bird  of  Litchfield.  He  commenced  practicing  medicine 
in  Litchfield,  about  1776  ;  but  about  1784,  (it  is  said,)  removed  to  Hart- 
ford, where  he  spent  the  remainder  of  his  li  fe. 

Dr.  Hopkins  was  one  of  the  most  distinguished  physicians  of  this 
State,  and  had  an  extensive  private  and  consultation  practice.  He  had 
a  wide  reputation  in  chronic  diseases,  and  particularly  in  pulmonary 
consumption.  He  possessed  great  originality  of  genius,  and  a  happy  fa- 
cility of  investigating  obscure  maladies,  and  finding  out  their  seats  and 
causes.  He  had  the  greatest  confidence  in  himself,  and  rarely  failed  to 
secure  it  in  others.  Having  a  just  sense  of  the  influence  of  the  mind  on 
the  body,  he  encouraged  hope  and  administered  consolation,  whilst  life 
remained.  He  was  eccentric  in  his  ways,  and  ugly  and  uncouth  in  his 
appearance,  and  these  things  sometimes  contributed  to  his  success.  On 
a  pleasant  summer's  day,  he  was  called,  a  perfect  stranger,  to  visit  a 
child,  ill  of  scarlet  fever.  He  entered  the  house  in  his  usual  abrupt 
manner,  and  found  the  sick  room  hot,  the  keyhole  and  cracks  stopped, 
and  the  little  sufferer  loaded  with  bed  clothes.  He  rolled  his  big,  staring 
eyes  about  the  room,  and  without  uttering  a  w^ord,  took  the  child  in  his 
arms,  and  walked  quickly  out  of  the  house.  The  household  and  neigh- 
borhood followed  with  broom  sticks.  He  kept  them  oft',  liowever, 
seated  himself  in  a  refreshing  shade,  ordered  wine  to  be  brought,  and 

*  I  am  much  indebted,  in  this  notice,  to  Dr.  Hough's  History  of  Jefferson  County.  In  that 
work,  however,  there  are  many  errors  relating  to  Hopkins,  and  I  may  have  copied  some  of 
them. 


APPENDIX.  415 

soon  restored  the  child.  In  another  case,  he  visited  a  female  in  the 
crisis  of  a  fever,  whom  her  friends  supposed  to  be  near  her  end.  The 
fatlier  said,  "My  daughter  is  dying,  had  I  not  better  send  for  the  min- 
ister ?"  "  No !"  replied  the  doctor,  "  but  you  may  call  an  undertaker 
and  have  her  measured  for  a  coffin."  The  father,  indignant  at  the  harsh- 
ness of  the  reply,  remonstrated  in  severe  language.  The  doctor  explained, 
"  My  meaning  is,  you  may  as  well  send  for  the  one  as  the  other.  If  your 
daughter  is  allowed  to  be  quiet,  she  will  certainly  recover;  but  if  you 
disturb  her,  as  you  propose,  she  will,  in  my  opinion,  surely  die."  The 
suggestion  was  followed,  and  the  patient  recovered.* 

AVhcnever  ho  [Dr.  Hopkins]  became  much  interested  in  a  case,  his  attentions 
were  unceasing  ;  den^-ing  all  other  calls  he  would  devote  his  days  and  nights, 
often  for  many  days  in  succession,  to  the  case,  and  not  unfrequently  administer 
every  dose  of  medicine  with  his  own  hand.  In  one  case,  about  a  critical  period, 
he  was  suspicious  that  the  medicines  might  require  variation.  He  could 
not  sleep,  got  up  in  the  night,  rode  four  miles  to  his  patient,  felt  his  pulse 
and  skin,  made  signs  for  him  to  put  out  his  tongue,  and  being  satisfied  that  all  was 
right,  left  the  house  without  speaking  to  the  patient  or  nurse. — [Thacher's  Amer- 
ican Biography.] 

Dr.  Hopkins  was  indefatigable  in  literary  and  scientific  pursuits. 
AVhen  engaged  on  a  subject  which  greatly  interested  him,  he  became 
abstracted  and  sometimes  forgot  to  go  to  bed.  His  wife  occasionally 
fountl  him  in  the  morning  sitting  in  the  precise  position  in  which  she  had 
left  him  the  evening  before.  His  memory  was  peculiarly  retentive  ; 
and  s>  familiar  was  he  Avith  the  great  English  poets,  that  he  would  often 
entertain  his  friends  by  repeating  the  more  valuable  portions  of  their 
writings.     Milton  and  Pope  were  favorite  authors. 

Dr.  Hopkins  was  well  known  as  one  of  a  circle  of  distinguished  lit- 
erary characters  and  poets,  who,  out  of  the  State,  were  called  the 
"  Hartford  wits."  He  was  associated  with  Trumbull  and  Barlow  in  the 
composition  of  the  "  Arnachiad,"  a  satirical  poem,  designed  to  show  the 
precarious  condition  of  the  State  under  the  old  confederation.  He  was 
afterwards  concerned  in  the  production  of  the  "  Echo,"  and  "  The  Politi- 
cal Green  House."  The  last  was  first  published  in  pamphlet  form  ;  the 
other  papers  in  the  gazettes  of  the  day,  in  Hartford  and  New  Haven.  The 
more  celebrated  of  the  poems  known  to  be  exclusively  Hopkins'  are  the 
Hypocrite's  Hope,  and  an  Elegy  on  the  Victim  of  a  Cancer  Quack. 
After  Trumbull,  he  was  the  most  eminent  satirist  of  his  day.  He  pub- 
lished nothing  with  his  name. 

*  See  a  biographical  sketch  in  Thacher's  American  Medical  Biography,  prepared  by  Drs. 
Thomas  Miner  and  Samuel  B.  Woodward. 


4:16  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUET. 

In  person,  Dr.  Hopkins  was  tall,  lean,  stooping.  His  features  were 
large,  his  eyes  liglit,  with  a  strongly  marked  countenance  and  uncom- 
monly long  limbs.  In  youth,  he  was  muscular  and  athletic.  When  a 
volunteer  in  the  army  of  the  Revolution,  a  party  of  officers  were  at- 
tempting to  fire  a  '*  king's  arm  "  held  in  one  hand  with  the  arm  extend- 
ed at  full  length.  What  others  could  not  do,  Hopkins,  to  the  aston- 
ishment of  all,  accomplished   with  ease. 

Dr.  Hopkins  received  from  Yale  College  the  honorary  degree  of  A.  M. 
in  1784.  He  was  one  of  the  founders  of  the  Connecticut  Medical  Soci- 
ety, and  while  he  lived,  took  an  active  part  in  its  proceedings.  He  died, 
in  the  midst  of  his  usefulness,  April  14,  1801. 

SAMUEL  MILES  HOPKINS,  LL.  D. 

The  subject  of  this  memoir,  the  son  of  Samuel  and  Molly  (Miles) 
Hopkins,  and  a  descendant  in  the  fifih  generation  of  John  Hopkins,  was 
born  at  Salem,  in  Waterbury,  on  the  9th  May,  1772.  At  his  death, 
which  occurred  in  the  village  of  Geneva,  New  York,  in  Oct.  1837,  he 
left  behind  him  an  autobiography  in  manuscript,  from  which  it  will  be 
most  convenient  to  draw  an  account  of  his  early  years  and  recollections. 

The  house  in  which  I  was  born  [he  writes]  stood  about  a  quarter  or  half  a  mile 
south  of  the  principal  dwelling  on  the  Hopkins  farm,  and  was  occupied  by  my 
father  as  it  had  been  by  his  father  and  perhaps  grandfather  before  him.  I 
mention  it  on  account  of  a  tradition,  which  I  imperfectly  remember,  to  this  ef- 
fect. My  grandfather's  oldest  brother,  John,  was  to  have  removed  to  some  l\ir 
distant  place,  (Stockbridge,  I  suspect ;)  but  going  there  he  found  danger  from  the 
Indians,  and  so  returned  and  lived  in  this  house,  the  one  my  grandfather  did  op 
was  to  occupy.  This  great  uncle  John,  I  remember.  I  have  therefore  seen  a  man 
who  in  eflFect  was  driven  back  by  fear  of  Indians  to  within  fourteen  miles  of  New 
Haven.  In  1826,  I  visited  the  old  Hopkins  place — no  change  except  the  slow 
workings  of  time  upon  wooden  buildings  a  century  old.  But  the  grape  vine  was 
gone,  and  the  huge  apple  and  pear  trees  were  rotting  down  with  age.  I  remem- 
ber a  scene,  which  must  have  happened  at  the  house  where  I  was  born,  in  the 
spring  of  1774,  when  I  was  twenty-three  months  old  ;  memory  now  presents  to  my 
view  that  house  ;  the  door  yard  and  the  stone  foundation  and  embankment  as  they 
were  ;  and  when  more  than  fifty  years  after  I  saw  the  same  place,  I  found  the  pic- 
ture entirely  faithful.  I  well  remember  hearing  my  grandfather,  in  the  fall  of  1774 
read  much  in  the  papers  about  "  Ty,"  for  so  the  name  of  Ticonderoga  was  written 
for  brevity,  and  I  remember  feeling  a  sentiment  of  feverish  dislike  at  the  frequent 
repetition  of  the  senseless  sound.  From  that  time  my  recollections  furnish  a  good 
many  pictures  of  men  and  things  pertaining  to  Revolutionary  times.  Hence  my 
frequent  remark  that  perhaps  the  period  of  my  life  embraces  up  to  this  time  the 
most  interesting  period  of  sixty  years  in  civil  history  that  has  yet  occurred. 

I  remember  something  of  the  young  men  hurrying  ofiF  to  meet  Burgoyne ;   and 


APPENDIX.  417 

the  deep  and  anxious  solicitude  with  which  my  father  and  his  neighbors  would  talk 
of  public  affairs.  I  remember  my  father  being  absent  with  the  militia  who 
marched  in  defense  of  New  York,  in  11^  &,  when  I  was  a  few  months  more  than 
four  years  old.  I  very  well  remember  the  rejoicings  at  the  capture  of  Coi-nwallis.  I 
have  seen  General  Washington ;  been  a  Uttle  acquainted  with  the  elder  Adams, 
and  with  Jay,  Schuyler,  Chnton  and  Pickering;  have  been  a  good  deal  ac- 
quainted with  Charles  Coatesworth  Pinkney  and  John  Marshall ;  and  have  been 
conversant  in  business  of  the  bar  with  that  very  extraordinary  man,  Aaron  Burr, 
and  that  very  admirable  and  wonderful  man,  Alexander  Hamilton.  If  then  we 
add,  that  the  entire  history  of  the  Federal  constitution,  and  the  entire  revolutions 
of  Europe  from  1789  come  within  my  fresh  recollections,  you  will  admit  that  we 
must  look  forward  and  not  backward  for  a  more  important  period  in  temporal 
afiPairs. 

After  spending  several  years  witli  the  family  of  his  uncle,  Dr.  Lemuel 
Hopkins,  attending  the  free  Grammar  School,  and  reading  medicine,  Mr. 
Hopkins,  in  1787,  entered  the  Sophomore  class  in  Yale  College. 

I  passed  three  years  [he  says]  at  New  Haven ;  ardent,  intensely  studious,  fac- 
tious, infidel,  opinionated ;  loving  my  friends  devotedly,  and  beloved  by  them.  I 
scarcely  doubted  but  I  was  to  accomplish  some  great  thing  upon  the  earth.  By 
the  diligent  improvement  of  time  I  laid  in  a  stock  of  knowledge  upon  many  sub- 
jects, particularly  history,  for  the  study  of  which  I  have  had  no  other  opportunity. 
The  spirit  of  Yale  College  was  at  that  time  a  spirit  of  literary  ambition  and  of  in- 
fidelity. I  was  not  in  good  favor  with  the  Faculty,  and  took  no  pains  to  con- 
ciliate their  good  will.  But  they  gave  me  one  of  the  three  Enghsh  orations,  which 
were  then  reputed  the  highest  appointments.  I  refused  to  attend  at  commence- 
ment ;  and  they  refused  me  my  degree ;  and  the  degree  of  Doctor  of  Laws,  con- 
ferred when  my  second  son  entered  Yale  College,  was  the  first  and  only  one  I  ever 
received.  Having  resolved  on  the  profession  of  the  law,  I  entered,  in  the  fall  of 
1791,  the  office  of  Judge  (then  Mr.)  Reeve  in  Litchfield.  His  law  school  contain- 
ed more  than  twenty  pupils  and  was  already  celebrated  throughout  the  union. 
He  was  altogether  an  admirable  man,  of  a  purity,  sincerity  and  guilelessness  of 
heart,  such  as  I  have  seen  in  few  men  in  this  world.  His  daily  lectures  were  most 
happy,  from  his  admirable  faculty  of  carrying  always  on  a  view  of  the  history  and 
reason  of  every  principle.  I  have  no  doubt  but  his  lectures  are  yet  felt  and  long 
will  be,  in  their  happy  influence  upon  the  juridical  department  of  our  country's  pub- 
lic economy.     At  a  subsequent  time  he  became  a  most  devoted  Christian. 

After  only  eighteen  months'  study,  Mr.  Hopkins  was  unexpectedly, 
and  in  violation  of  a  general  rule,  offered  an  examination  for  admission 
to  the  bar.  In  April  of  the  same  year,  (1793,)  he  removed  to  Pough- 
keepsie,  N.  Y.,  and  put  himself  under  the  tuition  of  two  young  lawyers 
of  excellent  reputation,  well  known  subsequently  as  Chancellor  Kent, 
and  Judge  Radcliff  of  Brooklyn  ;  with  both  of  whom  he  maintained  an 
uninterrupted  friendship  of  forty  years.  In  three  weeks  of  intense  ap- 
plication, he  acquired  such  a  knowledge  of  the  practice  of  the  New  York 
courts,  then  reputed  a  mystery  demanding  three  years  clerkship,  as  to 
27 


418  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBURT. 

pass  a  successful  examination.  His  license  was  dated  May  9tli,  1793, 
the  day  he  was  twenty-one  years  old.  Col.  Burr,  who  aimed  to  attach 
to  himself  young  men  of  talent  and  energy,  made  the  motion  for  liis 
admission,  and  subsequently  presented  him  a  library  of  choice  law 
books,  saying  he  "  might  settle  it  in  his  will,  if  he  chose."  Mr.  Hopkins, 
however,  insisted  on  paying  him  the  full  value  of  the  books. 

He  began  business  as  a  lawyer  in  the  young  village  of  Oxford,  Che- 
nango Co.,  where  be  drew  his  first  law  draft  "  on  the  head  of  a  barrel, 
under  a  roof  made  of  poles,  and  in  the  rain,  which  was  partly  kept 
from  spattering  the  paper  by  a  broad-brimmed  hat." 

In  1794,  he  removed  to  New  York  City,  on  the  invitation  of  James 
Watson,  Esq.,  who  entered  into  an  extensive  and  liberal  arrangement 
with  him  for  the  survey  and  sale  abroad  of  Virginia  lands.  In  the  pros- 
ecution of  this  scheme,  Mr.  Hopkins  visited  England  and  the  continent 
of  Europe  during  the  years  1796  and  '97. 

I  had  obtained  [he  says]  upwards  of  300,000  acres,  such  as  I  thought  I  could 
safely  and  honorably  recommend.  American  lands  had  become  disgraced  by  the 
operations  of  Robert  Morris  and  others,  and  I  finally  failed  of  my  object.  But  I 
lingered  in  Europe  with  the  assent  of  Mr.  Watson,  partly  with  the  distant  hope  of 
better  success,  but  more  to  seize  that  opportunity  of  enlarging  my  knowledge  of 
men  and  things.  Besides  my  business,  my  object  was  to  see  and  learn  all  I  could. 
I  attended  Parliament,  and  heard  Pitt,  Fox  and  Sheridan ;  the  House  of  Lords, 
and  saw  Loughborough  on  the  woolsack ;  the  King's  Bench,  and  saw  Lord  Ken- 
yon,  Ashurst,  Gross  and  Lawrence  ;  the  Common  Pleas,  and  saw  Buller  and  heard 
him  give  an  opinion,  and  no  man  in  England  gained  my  admiration  more  than  he. 
Once  or  twice  I  was  on  the  point  of  concluding  a  great  operation.  The  Bank  of 
England  stopped  paying  specie.  Then  came  the  mutiny  at  the  Nore,  the  reverses 
of  the  Duke  of  York  in  Fhinders  and  the  success  of  the  French.  Many  capitalists 
thought  of  seeking  some  safe  investments  in  America,  but  did  not  love  very 
plainly  to  avow  it  ;  and  on  the  whole,  the  firmness  of  the  British  nation  under  ac- 
cumulated difficulties  inspired  me  with  great  respect  for  the  national  character. 

The  summer  and  autumn  of  1797  he  spent  in  Paris,  attending  the 
lectures  of  Fourcroy  and  Charles,  and  studying  the  French  character  and 
objects  of  curiosity  in  art  and  science.  He  witnessed  the  coup  d'etat  of 
the  18th  Fructidor,  and  the  reception  of  Bonaparte  on  his  return  from 
his  Italian  campaign,  and  observed  to  Joel  Barlow,  his  fellow  lodger, 
that  he  was  satisfied  the  French  never  could  maintain  self-government. 
His  account  of  the  manner  in  which  the  elections  were  conducted,  by  or- 
dering bodies  of  troops  into  all  the  large  towns  and  placing  opposition 
candidates  under  arrest,  would  serve  as  a  very  accurate  description  of 
the  freedom  of  elections  under  Louis  Napoleon. 

Returning  from  abroad,  Mr.  Hopkins  engaged  in  the  practice  of  law 


APPENDIX.  419 

in  the  city  of  New  York,  where  in  the  year   1800  he  married  Sarah 
Elizabeth,  daughter  of  Moses  Rogers,  Esq.,  who  still  (1857)  survives. 

In  1810,  in  company  with  his  brother-in-law,  Mr.  B.  W.  Rogers  of 
New  York,  Mr.  Hopkins  purchased  two  tracts  of  land  on  the  Genesee 
River,  and  engaged  on  a  large  scale  in  the  business  of  farming.  Though 
conducted  with  great  energy  and  skill,  the  enterprise,  from  the  over- 
throw of  credit  and  the  disappearance  of  currency  following  the  war, 
turned  out  unfortunately. 

One  of  the  most  delightful  dreams  of  my  fancy,  [he  observes,]  in  going  to  the 
"West,  was  to  have  my  parents  near  me,  so  that  we  might  live  in  each  other's 
society,  and  some  in  turn  might  close  the  eyes  of  the  others.  It  was  otherwise 
ordered;  and  I  already  Ijegan  to  see  the  clouds  of  disappointment  gathering 
around  my  establishment.  I  cleared  land,  fenced  fields  and  multiplied  my  sheep. 
I  built  a  house,  a  village,  and  mills  and  farm  buildings.  From  the  river,  my 
operations  extended  back  to  the  pine  woods,  near  three  miles.  But  I  made  these 
improvements  at  the  enormous  war  prices  of  labor  and  produce ;  and  when  in 
turn  I  had  the  wheat  of  one  hundred  acres  to  sell,  it  would  not  command,  in  cash 
twenty-five  cents  per  bushel,  for  any  quantity,  great  or  small.  The  wool  of  fifteen 
hundred  sheep  sold  proportionally  low,  or  nearly  so.  Of  these  sheep,  a  select 
flock  of  three  hundred,  full  merinos,  were  bred  with  more  care,  I  presume,  than 
any  other  man  had  ever  used.  Losses  came  upon  losses  like  the  beating  of  hai  1 ; 
but  the  greatest  was  that  money  disappeared  from  the  country,  and  property 
ceased  to  have  any  but  a  very  low  exchangeable  value.  When  afterwards  I  came 
to  sell  my  Moscow  estate,  at  a  loss  of  $50,000  compared  with  its  late  saleable 
value,  I  deemed  the  sale  rather  a  fortunate  escape. 

Mr.  Hopkins  removed  to  the  city  of  Albany,  and  resumed  the  prac- 
tice of  law.  His  studies  had  led  him  to  pay  particular  attention  to  the 
subject  of  crime  and  punishment;  and  in  1826,  he  was  appointed  by 
the  Legislature  commissioner,  with  two  associates,  to  arrange  and  super- 
intend the  whole  penitentiary  system  of  the  State.  He  engaged  in 
this  work  with  characteristic  enthusiasm.  He  corresponded,  traveled, 
experimented  with  great  pains  in  relation  to  prison  diet  and  rations,  en- 
lightened public  opinion  by  a  series  of  essays,  recommended  the  Auburn 
or  silent  system  of  penal  labor,  and  with  his  fellow  commissioners  built 
and  governed  the  State's  prison  at  Sing  Sing.  The  subject  of  prison  dis- 
cipline continued  greatly  to  interest,  and  more  or  less  to  occupy  him,  dur- 
ing the  remainder  of  his  life.  He  withdrew  entirely  from  legal  practice, 
removed  to  the  village  of  Geneva,  and  spent  his  last  years,  enjoying  an 
ample  competence,  in  literary  pursuits,  horticulture,  the  society  of 
friends  and  religious  and  philanthropic  labors.  He  died  a  triumphant 
Christian  death,  October  8th,  1837. 

At  different  times  of  his  life,  Mr.  Hopkins  represented  his  fellow  citi. 


420  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUEY. 

zens  in  the  state  and  national  Legislatures,  and  presided  as  one  of  the 
judges  of  the  western  district  of  the  State  of  New  York.  He  left  behind 
him  at  his  death  an  unfinished  work  on  jury  trials,  and  another  nearly 
complete  consisting  of  aphorisms  in  ontology,  exhibiting  the  application 
•of  demonstrative  reasoning  to  moral  truths. 

Some  of  the  above  details  may  perhaps  be  more  minute  than  the  inte- 
rest of  the  subject  will  justify  to  ordinary  readers.  But  supposing  the  object 
of  these  memoirs  to  be  to  furnish  in  a  limited  compass  a  distinct  impres- 
sion of  the  men  described,  it  was  judged  this  would  be  best  efiected  in 
the  present  instance  by  leaving  him  in  part  to  speak  for  himself.  The 
autobiography  from  which  the  brief  extracts  of  this  sketch  are  taken 
was  by  the  writer  merely  designed  for  the  instruction  of  his  children ; 
but  it  is  believed  the  use  here  made  of  it  will  involve  no  breach  of 
confidence. 

Mr.  Hopkins,  though  admirable  as  a  converser  and  the  delight  of  the 
social  circle,  was  not  distinguished  as  a  public  speaker,  either  at  the  bar 
or  in  the  senate.  In  politics,  he  had  no  success,  and  indeed  almost  no 
ambition.  He  had  a  generous  kind  of  instinct  which  always  made  him 
a  member  of  the  losing  party.  He  was  a  Federalist;  a  Clay  man;  an 
Anti-Mason  ;  a  Whig ;  a  zealous  advocate  of  Temperance  ;  a  coloniza- 
tionalist  and  a  hater  of  slavery.  For  near  the  last  twenty  years  of  his 
life,  he  was  a  member  of  the  Presbyterian  church,  and  a  living,  exem- 
plary Christian.  He  was  generous  minded  and  careless  of  his  own  in- 
terests to  a  fault ;  naturally  impulsive,  but  thoroughly  self-disciplined  ; 
full  of  warm  sympathies  and  a  model  of  refined  courtesy  in  social  life. 
Few  men  have  had  more  attached  friends  or  left  a  larger  circle  of  genu- 
ine mourners. 

In  person,  Mr.  Hopkins  was  about  six  feet  in  height,  and  perfectly 
formed  for  strength  and  acti\aty.  He  was  a  rapid  walker,  a  bold  rider 
and  was  fond  of  a  good  horse.  He  retained  possession  of  all  his  physical 
and  mental  activity  up  to  the  seizure  of  the  attack  which  terminated  his 
life.  His  biography  contains  little  or  nothing  of  attractive  incident  or 
public  interest.  It  is  the  life  of  a  man  of  fine  powers,  who  was  never 
highly  successful  in  the  pursuit  of  either  fame,  honors  or  wealth  ;  but 
who  was  unspeakably  happy  in  this,  that  the  discipline  of  life  chastened 
his  spirit,  and  brought  him  through  many  trials  to  the  experience  of  a 
peace  that  passelh  understanding  and  a  hope  full  of  immortality. 

Dr.  AMBROSE  IVES. 
He  was  the  son  of  Abijah,  and  the  grandson  of  Abraham   Ives  ;  was 
born  in  Wallingford,  Dec.  30,  1786,  and  died  in  Waterbury,  Jan.  31, 


APPENDIX,  421 

1852,  He  studied  medicine  with  Dr,  Cornwall  of  Cheshire,  and  settled 
in  Wolcott  about  1808.  Here  he  married,  March  30,  1817,  Wealthy 
U,  Upson,  and  was  engaged  in  an  extensive  practice  till  1827.  He 
then  removed  to  Wallingford  to  look  after  his  deceased  father's  estate. 
After  an  interval  of  two  years,  he  resolved  to  resume  his  professional 
business,  and  settled  in  Plymouth.  There  he  soon  obtained  a  large 
practice.  In  1834,  he  became  interested  in  the  manufacture  of  gilt 
buttons  at  "VVaterville  and  took  charge  of  the  business.  In  1  837,  he  re- 
moved to  Waterbury,  and  in  1839  sold  out  his  interest  at  Waterville. 
Soon  after,  he  bought  into  the  company  of  Brown  &  Elton,  and  contin- 
ued in  this  connection  till  his  decease,  but  without  himself  engaging  in 
the  management  of  the  business. 

As  a  physician,  Dr.  Ives  was  sound,  discriminating  and  skillful.  No 
practitioner  in  the  vicinity  in  which  he  lived  was  more  deservedly  esteem- 
ed for  strong  common  sense  and  matured  judgment.  As  a  business  man, 
he  was  enlightened,  sagacious  and  stable.  Few  men  understood  human 
nature  more  perfectly,  or  could  see  farther  into  the  course  of  events  de- 
pending on  the  human  will.  By  able  management  and  financial  skill 
he  succeeded  in  acquiring  a  large  property. 

Dr.  Ives  was  not  tall,  but  stout,  and  in  the  latter  part  of  his  life  be- 
came somewhat  corpulent.  He  preserved  the  plain  and  economical 
habits  of  his  early  life.  In  conversation,  he  was  shrewd,  intelligent  and 
facetious.  He  had  a  fund  of  anecdote  and  illustration,  and  abounded  in 
witty  and  humorous  remarks.  Few  were  more  companionable  or  in- 
structive. 

Rev.  JONATHAN  JUDD 

Was  the  third  son  of  Capt,  William  Judd,  and  the  grandson  of  Dea, 
Thomas  Judd,  and  was  born  in  the  village  of  Waterbury,  Oct.  4,  1719. 
He  entered  Yale  College,  and  was  graduated  in  1741,  being  the  class- 
mate and  bosom  friend,  as  well  as  first  cousin,  of  Samuel  Hopkins,  2d. 
He  became  the  first  minister  of  the  second  precinct  or  parish  of  North- 
ampton, now  the  town  of  Southampton,  where  a  church  was  gathered 
and  he  ordained  June  8,  1743,  a  few  months  before  the  ordination  of  Mr. 
Hopkins.  The  two  were  correspondents  for  many  years  ;  but  at  last  an 
alienation  of  feeling,  followed  by  non-intercourse,  took  place,  in  conse- 
quence of  a  difterence  in  theological  views.  Mr.  Judd  remained  the 
faithful  pastor  of  the  Southampton  church  for  sixty  years,  and  died  July 
28,  1803.  The  house  which  he  built  in  1743,  and  which  was  surround- 
ed by  a  palisade  in  the  French  and  Indian  wars  for  security  against  sur- 
prise, is  still  standing  in  a  good  state  of  preservation.     By  direction  of 


422 


HISTOKT    OF   WATERBUKY. 


his  will  his  sermons  were  burned,  to  the  number  of  nearly  three  thou- 
sand.    Two  or  three  had  been  published.* 

Mr.  Judd  married,  Nov.  28,  1743,  Silence,  daughter  of  Capt.  Jonathan 
Sheldon  of  Suffield.  He  had  seven  children,  all  of  whom  survived  the 
father.  Of  the  sons,  the  second,  Sylvester  Judd,  was  the  father  of  Syl- 
vester Judd  now  of  Northampton,  extensively  known  for  his  historical 
and  genealogical  researches.  The  last  was  the  father  of  Rev.  Sylvester 
Judd,  (recently  deceased,)  of  Augusta,  Maine,  celebrated  as  a  preacher, 
public  lecturer  and  literary  man,  and  the  author  of  several  books  of 
much  merit. 


JOHN"  KINGSBURY 

Was  the  son  of  Nathaniel  Kingsbury,  and  was  born  in  that  part  of 
Norwich  now  called  Franklin,  Dec.  30,  1762.  In  his  boyhood,  he 
labored  on  the  farm  with  his  father ;  but  at  the  age  of  seventeen,  was 
sent  to  his  uncle.  Dr.  Charles  Backus,  an  eminent  minister  of  Somers, 
to  prepare  for  college.  In  the  following  year,  he  entered  Yale  College  ; 
but  he  soon  left,  and  engaged  as  a  marine  on  board  a  privateer.  He 
made  two  cruises,  and  assisted  in  taking  two  prizes.  Before  his  return 
from  the  last  cruise  he  was  taken  dangerously  ill,  and  was  in  a  critical 
condition  for  a  long  time.  After  recovering,  he  returned  to  college  and 
graduated  in  1786.  He  then  went  to  Waterbury,  and  taught  in  the 
new  academy  about  one  year.  In  the  spring  of  1788,  he  entered  the 
Law  School  of  Judge  Reeve,  at  Litchfield,  and  in  1790,  was  admitted  to 
ithe  bar  in  Litchfield  county.  His  health  was  poor,  and  he  did  not 
immediately  enter  upon  the  practice  of  his  profession  ;  but  in  the  fall  of 
1791,  he  settled  in  Waterbury  and  opened  a  law  office.  Three  years 
:afterwards,  (Nov.  6,  1794,)  he  married  Mercy,  the  eldest  daughter  of 
Dea.  Stephen  Bronson,  by  whom  he  had  four  children,  Charles  Denizen, 
Julius  Jesse  Bronson,  John  Southmayd  and  Sarah  Susanna,  all  of  whom 
■except  the  last  survived  their  father.  His  wife  died  of  pulmonary 
-consumption,  March  21,  1813. 

In  1793,  Mr.  Kingsbury  was  chosen  town  clerk,  and  held  the  office 
•much  of  the  time  till  1818.  In  1796,  he  was  appointed  a  justice  of  the 
'peace,  and  was  continued  in  office  till  1830.  Seventeen  times  between 
1796  and  1813,  he  represented  the  town  in  the  Legislature.  On  the 
■death  of  Judge  Hopkins,  in  1801,  he  was  appointed  to  fill  the  vacancies 
an  the  Probate  and  County  Courts.     He  was  continued  as  judge  of  Pro- 

*  Genealogy  of  the  Judds ;  by  Sylvester  Judd,  1867. 


APPENDIX.  423 

bate  for  tlie  District  of  Waterbury  till  1834,  and  as  a  judge  of  the 
County  Court  (the  last  year  presiding  judge)  till  May,  1820. 

Judge  Kingsbury  acquired,  in  an  eminent  degree,  the  confidence  and 
respect  of  the  community  in  which  he  lived.  He  held  many  public 
offices,  and  always  discharged  his  duties  ably,  faithfully  and  acceptably. 
From  the  death  of  Judge  Hopkins  to  the  time  of  his  decease,  no  man  in 
the  town  was  more  honored,  respected  and  beloved. 

Judge  Kingsbury  was  a  popular  man,  but  he  became  so  in  conse- 
quence of  the  benevolence  of  his  character,  his  kindly  sympathies,  his 
agreeable  manners  and  many  excellent  qualities.  He  never  sacrificed 
principle  or  consistency.  He  was  a  good  neighbor  and  trusty  friend. 
Lively  in  his  manner,  easy  in  conversation,  often  facetious  in  his 
remarks,  his  company  was  sought  by  persons  of  all  ages  and  classes. 
His  long  aquihne  nose,  the  benevolent  smile  which  usually  played  upon 
his  countenance,  and  his  winning  way,  can  never  be  forgotten  by  those 
who  knew  him. 

Judge  Kingsbury  was  always  delicate  in  health,  and  for  the  last  twenty 
years,  or  more,  of  his  life,  had  strong  consumptive  tendencies.  He  died 
at  the  house  of  his  son-in-law,  William  Brown,  (with  whom  he  had  re- 
sided several  years,)  of  an  obstruction  of  the  bowels,  August  26,  1844. 

Maj.  JULIUS  J,.  B.  KINGSBURY 

"Was  the  second  son  of  John  Kingsbury,  and  was  born  Oct.  18,  179Y. 
As  in  his  youth  there  was  no  school  in  Waterbury  of  a  higher  grade 
than  a  district  school,  he  was  sent  from  home  and  pursued  his 
studies  at  different  times  with  the  Rev.  Dr.  Tyler,  then  of  South  Britain^ 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Hart  of  Plymouth  and  Daniel  Parker  of  Ellsworth,  a 
society  of  Sharon.  In  1819,  he  obtained  through  the  influence  of 
David  Daggett,  then  a  member  of  Congress,  the  appointment  of 
cadet  at  the  Military  Academy  at  West  Point.  He  left  this  in- 
stitution, in  regular  course,  in  1823  ;  was  attached  as  lieutenant 
to  the  second  regiment  of  infantry,  and  ordered  with  a  detachment  of 
troops  to  Sault  Ste.  Marie,  at  the  outlet  of  Lake  Superior,  to  as- 
sist in  building  the  fort  called  Fort  Brady.  Here  he  remained 
three  or  four  years,  under  Maj.  afterwards  Col.  Cutler,  during  which 
time  (while  on  leave  of  absence  visiting  his  friends  at  the  East) 
he  married  Miss  Jane  Stebbins,  of  New  York,  sister-in-law  of  Capt.  W. 
Becker,  also  of  the  2d  regiment.  Next,  he  was  ordered  with  a  detach- 
ment by  sea  to  New  Orleans  and  Nacogdoches,  then  on  our  southwestern 
frontier.  Afterwards,  he  was  stationed  for  a  time  at  Mackinaw  and 
Fort  Gratiot.    During  the  Black  Hawk  war  in  1832,  he  was  at  Chicago, 


42i  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

attached  to  the  commissary  department,  and  saw  much  hard  and  dan- 
gerous service.  While  there,  he  purchased  for  STOO  about  36  acres  of 
land  on  the  North  Branch  of  the  Chicago  River,  near  its  junction  with 
the  South  Branch,  and  about  two  acres  on  the  south  side  of  the  Main 
River,  the  latter  tract  in  the  heart  of  the  present  city,  and  the  former 
but  a  little  way  distant.  The  land  is  still  in  the  possession  of  the 
family,  and  is  now  thought  to  be  worth  several  hundred  thousand  dol- 
lars. When  the  purchase  was  made,  Chicago  was  in  its  infancy,  con- 
taining, in  1832,  according  to  M'Cullock,  but  five  small  stores  and  250 
inhabitants. 

Kingsbury  was  afterwards  at  Fort  Niagara.  Still  later,  during  the  dis- 
turbances on  our  northeastern  frontier,  he  was  stationed  at  Hancock 
Barracks,  Houlton,  Maine.  Thence,  after  the  breaking  out  of  the  Semi- 
nole war,  he  was  ordered,  with  his  command,  to  Tampa  Bay,  Florida. 
There  he  remained  three  years,  (with  the  exception  of  a  short  interval ;) 
and  his  constitution  was  so  broken  by  the  combined  influence  of  climate, 
exposure  and  fatigue,  that  he  never  recovered.  On  his  return  to  the 
North,  he  was  stationed  at  Sacketts  Harbor,  and  afterwards  a  second 
time  to  Fort  Brady.  He  left  this  last  post  early  in  1847,  to  join  Gen. 
Scott  before  Vera  Cruz.  He  assisted  in  the  capture  of  that  place,  and 
was  more  or  less  engaged  in  all  the  battles  which  occurred  on  the  march 
to  the  city  of  Mexico.  For  his  good  conduct  in  one  of  the  engagements 
near  the  city,  he  was  breveted.  Throughout  the  campaign,  he  acted  as 
lieut.  colonel  of  his  regiment,  though  he  was  at  that  time  only  a  captain. 

While  in  Mexico,  Capt.  Kingsbury  was  attacked  by  a  severe  brain 
fever,  which  seriously  threatened  his  life.  When  he  had  recovered 
sufficient  strength,  Gen.  Scott  sent  him  home  "  on  sick  leave."  In  Dec. " 
1848,  having  partially  regained  his  health,  he  was  ordered  with  a  part 
of  his  regiment  to  California,  where  he  remained  nearly  two  years. 
While  there,  he  was  promoted  and  transferred  to  the  sixth  regiment. 
He  returned  home  in  the  summer  of  1850,  but  too  much  out  of  health 
to  be  fit  for  duty.  He  spent  the  next  two  years  at  Washington  and 
with  his  friends  at  the  East,  on  sick  leave.  He  then  started  to  join  his 
regiment  at  St.  Louis;  but  was  detained  at  Detroit  by  the  illness  of 
himself  and  family,  where  he  was  compelled  to  spend  the  winter, 
(1852-3.)  While  at  Detroit,  owing  to  some  misunderstanding  with  the 
War  Department,  not  implicating  his  integrity  or  honor,  his  name  was 
stricken  from  the  army  roll.  Conceiving  himself  to  have  been  unfairly 
treated,  he  declined  to  make  any  explanation,  or  to  hold  any  communi- 
cation with  the  department.  Before  his  death,  however,  he  settled  all 
his  accounts  with   the  government  and  received  a  balance   which  was 


APPENDIX.  425 

found  due  him.  He  died  in  Washington,  when  on  the  point  of  leaving 
for  the  East,  of  malignant  dysentery,  July  26,  1856,  His  remains  were 
brought  to  Waterbury,  where  he  was  buried,  according  to  his  expressed 
wishes,  in  the  old  burying  ground  by  the  side  of  his  father. 

Maj.  Kingsbury  was  a  brave  and  skillful  ofBcer,  who  was  always  equal 
to  the  duties  imposed  upon  him.  He  was  nearly  thirty  years  connected 
with  the  army,  and  though  sometimes  charged  with  indolence  and  pro- 
crastination, was  ever  distinguished  for  honorable  conduct.  He  lost 
his  health  and  ruined  his  constitution  in  the  public  service.  Long  before 
his  death,  the  seeds  of  certain  dissolution  had  been  planted  in  his  sys- 
tem. His  loss  was  a  sore  bereavement  to  a  large  circle  of  friends  and 
acquaintances.  He  was  estimable  and  respectable  in  all  his  relations, 
and  his  memory  will  not  soon  be  lost.  He  left  behind  him  a  widow, 
a  daughter  who  married  Capt.  Buckner,  recently  of  the  U.  S,  Armv, 
and  a  son  named  Henry,  who  is  now  a  cadet  at  West  Point.  His  eld- 
est son,  Julius,  died  in  California  several  years  ago, 

MARK  LEAVENWORTH 

Was  born  in  New  Haven,  August  31st,  17*74,  and  died  in  Waterbury, 
Sept.  5th,  1849,  aged  75  years.  His  father,  Jesse  Leavenworth,  a  grad- 
uate of  Yale  College  and  a  captain  in  the  Revolution,  was  a  man  of 
much  enterprise,  and  previous  to  the  war  was  largely  engaged  (for  the 
times)  in  the  shipping  interest.  His  mother,  Katharine  Leavenworth, 
was  a  woman  of  great  spirit  and  firmness,  as  was  instanced  by  her  in- 
sisting on  remaining  at  her  residence,  during  the  invasion  of  New 
Haven  by  the  British,  while  her  husband  was  absent  conveying  their 
children  to  a  place  of  safety,  and  when  nearly  all  the  inhabitants  had 
lied. 

At  the  age  of  ten  years,  the  subject  of  this  notice  removed  with  his 
father  to  the  county  of  Caledonia,  in  Vermont,  at  which  time  there  was 
not  a  white  man  living  within  thirty  miles  in  the  direction  of  Canada,  and 
but  one  family  within  many  miles  of  their  residence.  The  father  owned 
what  are  now  the  towns  of  Danville  and  Peacham,  At  the  age  of  four- 
teen, becoming  dissatisfied,  he  determined  to  return  to  Connecticut. 
He  performed  the  journey  on  foot  and  alone.  The  distance  was  near 
three  hundred  miles.  After  his  return  to  New  Haven,  he  resided  in 
the  family  of  his  uncle,  Mark  Leavenworth,  Esq.,  who  sent  him  to 
a  school,  (Mansfield's,)  where  he  studied  geometry,  navigation  and  sur- 
veying, intending  to  go  to  sea,  an  idea  which  be  afterwards  relin- 
quished. Further  than  this,  his  school  education  was  limited,  being 
confined  to  reading,  writing,  geography  and  a  good  knowledge  of 
arithmetic. 


426  HISTORY   OF   WATERBUKY. 

After  leaving  scliool,  he  was  engaged  in  mechanical  pursuits.  He 
was  employed  for  a  number  of  years  with  Jesse  Hopkins  of  Waterbury, 
in  that  branch  of  the  silversmith  business  which  was  applied  to  making 
knee  and  shoe  buckles.  Near  the  period  of  his  majority,  the  fashions 
having  changed,  this  branch  of  the  business  became  worthless.  At  the 
age  of  twenty-one  years,  he  married  Anna,  the  daughter  of  Moses 
Cooke  of  Waterbury,  (a  woman  of  placid  temper,  excellent  sense  and 
great  moral  worth,)  and  commenced  life  with  no  other  capital  than 
great  energy,  a  determined  will  and  uncommonly  industrious  habits. 
They  had  seven  children,  six  of  whom  arrived  at  the  age  of  maturity,  of 
whom  the  eldest  two  alone  survive.  After  his  marriage,  he  engaged  in 
the  manufacture  of  axes  and  steelyards,  and  also  the  mountings  of  small 
arms,  (guns,)  such  as  ramrods,  bands  and  bayonets.  At  this  business 
he  employed  a  number  of  hands  until  the  year  1800.  In  the  fall  of 
that  year,  he  left  for  South  Carolina  and  Georgia  with  steelyards  and 
axes.  This  was  an  adventure  wnich  at  the  time  called  forth  more  re- 
mark and  excited  more  wonder  than  the  circumnavigation  of  the  globe 
would  in  our  day.  In  the  year  1801,  in  company  with  his  brother,  Dr. 
Frederick  Leavenworth,  he  collected  a  drove  of  mules  in  Vermont  and 
New  Hampshire,  which  were  driven  to  South  Carolina  and  Georgia. 
He  continued  in  this  business  about  five  years.  He  returned  in  the 
summers,  and  employed  himself  in  constructing  one  or  more  of  Whit- 
ney's cotton-gins.  The  gin  was  then  a  recent  invention.  After  ceasing 
to  go  South,  he  commenced  the  manufacture  of  clocks,  in  which  busi- 
ness he  was  for  many  years  extensively  engaged.  In  1829,  in  addition 
to  the  clock  business,  he  became  interested  with  his  son,  B.  F.  Leaven- 
worth, and  his  son-in-law,  Green  Kendrick,  in  the  manufacture  of  gilt ' 
buttons.  In  1835,  he  ceased  to  manufacture  clocks,  and  engaged  per- 
sonally in  the  manufacture  of  gilt  and  cloth  buttons,  with  his  son-in-law, 
C.  S.  Sperry,  which  he  continued  till  his  death.  He  was  a  pioneer  in 
manufacturing  in  the  town  of  Waterbury.  By  reading  and  observa- 
tion, he  became  a  man  of  much  intelligence.  He  was  benevolent  and 
public  spirited.  He  was  a  member  of  the  Congregational  church,  with 
which  he  and  his  wife  united  in  1817. — She  died  April  9th,  1842. 

In  person,  Mr.  Leavenworth  was  of  middle  stature,  his  frame  com- 
pactly and  firmly  knit  together,  and  his  constitution  good.  Though 
not  always  fortunate  in  business,  he  was  a  man  of  untiring  industry, 
and  indomitable  energy  and  perseverance.  It  was  when  laboring  under 
embarrassment  that  these  traits  were  most  conspicuous.  When  others 
would  have  despaired,  he  saw  reason  for  redoubled  effort  and  more 
untiring  application.     Under  a  load  which  would  have  broken  the  back 


APPENDIX.  427 

or  crushed  the  spirit  of  an  ordinary  man,  he  moved  with  freedom  and 
cheerfulness.  If  bad  'luck  overtook  him,  he  was  always  ready  to  try 
again,  and  never  failed  to  find  something  to  comfort  him.  "When  the 
storm  came  upon  him  in  1837,  and  he  was  obliged  to  yield,  he  con- 
soled himself  with  the  reflection  that  he  "  stood  it  longer  than  the 
United  States  Bank."  And  it  may  be  added  that  he  recovered  sooner. 
Mr.  Leavenworth  had  one  of  the  kindest,  of  hearts.  He  was  well  in- 
formed, sociable,  sensible  and  shrewd.  There  was  sometimes  an  archness 
and  a  dry  humor  in  his  remarks,  particularly  on  character,  which  ren- 
dered his  familiar  conversation  quite  attractive. 

Gen.  DANIEL  POTTER 
Was  one  of  the  thirteen  children  (the  twefth,  chronologically)  of  Dea* 
Daniel  Potter,  and  was  born  in  Northbury,  Feb.  15,  1758.  He  grad- 
uated at  Yale  College  in  1780,  married,  Jan.  25,  1781,  Martha,  daugh- 
ter of  Caleb  Humaston,  Esq.,  and  settled,  as  a  farmer,  in  Northbury, 
then  a  parish  of  Watertown.  He  was  a  representative  to  the  General 
xVssembly  several  times,  both  before  and  after  Northbury  was  made  (in 
1795)  a  distinct  town.  He  was  a  man  of  a  vigorous  intellect  and  a 
sound  judgment,  and  exerted  a  wide  influence.  His  tall,  erect  and  manly 
figure  was  a  fitting  tabernacle  for  a  mind  like  his. 

Gen.  Potter  had  four  children,  Horace,  Ansel,  Minerva  and  Daniel 
Tertius.     He  died  April  21,  1842,  and  his  wife  April  28,  1842.* 

MARK  RICHARDS 
Was  the  youngest  child  and  fifth  son  of  Abijah  Richards,  and  was 
born  July  15,  17 GO,  in  a  house  which  stood  on  the  west  side  of  Cook 
street,  near  where  Noah  Bronson  now  lives.  He  was  the  great  grand- 
son of  Obadiah  Richards,  one  of  the  first  planters  of  "Waterbury.  His 
mother  was  Huldah  Hopkins,  the  eldest  daughter  of  Timothy  Hopkins, 
and  sister  of  Samuel,  Daniel  and  Mark  Hopkins.  She  possessed  the 
strength  of  mind  which  belonged  to  her  family,  and  attended  per- 
sonally to  the  proper  training  of  her  son,  who  was  not  quite  thirteen 
years  of  age  when  his  father  died. 

When  the  Revolution  broke  out,  in  1775,  Richards  was  too  young  to 
enter  the  army ;  but  he  caught  the  spirit  of  the  times.  W^hen  he  be- 
came sixteen,  an  age  which  entitled  him  to  shoulder  a  musket,  he  de- 

*  Isaiah  Potter,  the  son  of  Dea.  Daniel  and  Martha  (Ray)  Potter,  was  born  in  Northbury, 
July  23,  1746  ;  graduated  at  Yale  College  in  1767,  in  the  same  class  as  John  Trumbull ;  was  or- 
dained at  Lebanon,  N.  H.,  in  Aug.  1772  ;  retired  from  his  charge  in  Sept.  1816,  and  died  by  his 
own  hand  in  August,  1817.    He  published  a  Masonic  sermon  delivered  at  Hanover,  N.  H.,  1802. 


428  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBURY. 

termined  to  join  the  army.  That  his  design  might  not  be  defeated  by 
the  interference  of  friends,  he  left  his  bed  in  the  night,  passed  out  of  the 
■window,  and  repaired  to  the  camp  of  Gen.  Wooster  and  enlisted.  In 
the  morning,  the  family  was,  of  course,  much  alarmed.  At  last,  infor- 
mation was  received  where  the  truant  boy  could  be  found,  and  his  eldest 
brother.  Street,  was  sent  to  bring  him  back,  without  fail.  On  applica- 
tion to  Gen.  Wooster,  and  after  a  statement  had  been  made  of  the  cir- 
cumstances of  the  case,  permission  was  obtained  for  the  young  recruit 
to  return.  He  declined  doing  so,  however,  most  peremptorily ;  and  de- 
clared that,  as  he  had  made  an  engagement  with  his  country,  he  would 
fulfill  it,  and  see  the  game  played  out.  As  he  was  of  a  determined  and 
persevering  disposition,  importunity  was  seen  to  be  useless,  and  the  dis- 
appointed brother  returned  reluctantly  to  his  sorrowing  friends.  The 
soldier-boy  remained  with  the  army  through  the  war;  was  with  the 
suffering  troops  at  Valley  Forge,  in  the  winter  of  1777-8  ;  was  present 
in  many  battles,  and  died  a  pensioner. 

After  the  war,  Mr.  Richards  went  to  Boston  and  became  the  partner 
of  his  brother  Giles,*  a  man  of  enterprise  and  mechanical  skill,  who 
carried  on  the  business  of  making  wool  and  cotton  cards  by  hand.  The 
Messrs.  Cutters  and  William  and  Amos  Whittemore,  the  last  the  invent- 
or of  the  famous  card  making  machine,  were  also  partners.  The  busi- 
ness was  prosperous. 

In  1796,  on  account  of  his  wife's  health,  Mr.  Richards  removed  from 
Boston  and  settled  in  Westminster,  Windham  County,  Vt.,  where  he 
became  a  tradesman.  He  was  soon  chosen  to  represent  the  town  in 
the  Legislature  of  the  State,  and  was  eight  years  a  member  of  that 
body,  between  1801  and  1834  inclusive.  In  1806,  1807,  1808  and 
1809,  he  was  high  sheriff  of  the  County;  in  1812  and  1824,  one  of  the 
electors  of  president  and  vice-president  of  the  U.  S.;  in  1813  and  1815, 
a  member  of  the  State  Council.  He  served  four  years  as  a  representa- 
tive in  Congress,  being  elected  in  1816  and  reelected  in  1818.  In 
1830,  he  was  chosen  lieutenant  governor  of  the  State. 

Mr.  Richards  was  distinguished  for  good  sense,  great  industry,  method 
in  business,  and  punctuality  in  all  his  engagements.  Till  the  close  of 
his  life  in  1844,  he  retained  the  high  respect  and  entire  confidence  of 
his  friends  and  fellow  citizens.     Soon  after  he  went  to  Boston,  he  mar- 

♦  Giles  Richards,  second  son  of  Abijah,  married  Sarah,  the  youngest  daughter  of  the  Rev. 
Thomas  Adams  of  Roxbury,  Mass.,  and  had  children— 1  .  Giles,  Jr. ;  2.  Adams,  who  removed  to 
Ohio  ;  3.  George,  of  Paris,  (France  ;)  4.  Sarah,  the  first  wife  of  Amos  Lawrence,  Esq.,  Boston ; 
6.  Mary,  who  married  John  K.  Adan,  Boston. 

Giles  Richards  was  ultimately  unfortunate  in  business,  and  died  at  Dedham,  Mass.,  much 
respected. 


1 
APPENDIX.  429 

ried  Ann  Dorr,  -svidow  of  Joseph  Dorr  of  Boston,  and  daughter  of  Jo- 
seph Riiggles  of  Roxbury,  Mass.,  a  woman  of  good  family,  by  whom  he 
had  several  children.  Two  only,  daughters,  suivived  him,  one  of  whom 
married  the  Hon,  William  C.  Bradley,  formerly  member  of  Congress 
from  Vermont,  and  the  other  Hon.  Samuel  W.  Porter  of  Springfield, 
Vermont. 

JAMES  MITCHELL  LAMSON  SCOVILL. 

He  was  J.bg"  eldest  born  of  James  and  Alathea  (Lamson  )  Scovill, 
ami  the  grandson  of  Rev.  James  Scovill.  He  was  born  Sept.  4,  1789, 
and  died  May  J 6,  1857.  His  early  education  was  obtained  at  the  dis- 
trict schools.  According  to  his  own  account  of  himself,  he  was  a  "  wide 
awake  "  youth,  and  kept  the  pedagogues  busy.  At  the  age  of  seventeen, 
he  became  a  clerkiu  his  father's  store.  In  1811,  Sept.  19,  he  and  Frede- 
rick Leavenworth  bought  out  the  factory,  machinery,  tools  and  stock  of 
Abel  Porter  &  Co.,  and  in  connection  with  David  Hayden  commenced 
the  raanufj^cture  of  gilt  and  brass  buttons,  under  the  name  of  Leaven- 
worth, Hayden  &  Scovill.*  Some  of  the  work  was  done  in  the  old  grist 
mill.  Mr.  Hayden  was  the  only  practical  button  maker  in  the  compa- 
nv^^Mr^^covilf  sold  the  goods  and  attended  to  the  out-of-door  busi- 
ness. When  traveling,  he  improved  every  chance  to  pick  up  old 
copper.  About  once  a  month,  he  made  a  journey  to  the  iron  mill  at 
Bradleyville,  Litchfield,  and  waited  to  have  his  brass  rolled.  On  one  of 
his  return  trips  he  had  an  old  copper  still  in  his  sleigh.  As  there  was 
no  other  place  to  ride,  he  got  inside.  Afterwards  he  was  overturned,  but 
drawing  his  head  within,  he  rolled  down  the  hill  uninjured. 

About  1811,  the  Waterbury  Woolen  Co.,  under  the  superintendence 
of  Austin  Steele,  commenced  operations.  James  Scovill  and  Leaven- 
worth, Hayden  &  Scovill  were  stockholders.  When  peace  was  de- 
clared, woolen  goods  went  down,  and  this  investment  was  a  total  loss. 

Leavenworth,  Hayden  &  Scovill  continued  business,  with  very  mod- 
erate success,  till  the  fall  of  1827,  when  Dr.  Leavenworth  and  Mr.  Hayden 
sold  out)  and  William  H.  Scovill  bought  in.    Dr.  L.  got  for  his  one  third 

♦  The  names  of  all  the  partners  were  introduced  into  the  partnership  name  at  the  particular 
request  of  Mr.  Hayden.  He  had  had  some  painful  experiencesVhich  made  him  strenuous  on  this 
point.  His  name  was  not  known  in  the  firm  of  Abel  Porter  &  Co,  While  a  member  of  this 
company,  without  much  knowledge  of  the  forms  of  business,  he  went  to  New  Haven  to  draw 
money  out  of  the  bank.  He  drew  a  check,  signed  the  company's  name,  and  presented  it  to  the 
old  New  Haven  Bank.  The  officers  did  not  know  him.  He  must  bring  evidence  of  his  individual 
identity  and  partnership  relation.  The  day  was  spent  in  fruitless  endeavors  to  find  the  needed 
proof.  Of  course  he  was  in  a  towering  rage,  and  showered  epithets  upon  the  stupid  bank  ofiB- 
cials.  He  returned  home  without  money  enough  to  pay  gnte  fees,  unburdening  himself  to  the 
rocks  and  trees  on  the  way. 


430  mSTOKT    OF   WATERBUEY. 

interest  about  $6,000.  The  new  firm  toot  the  namepy.  M.  L.  &  W.  H. 
Scovill.  They  went  on  prosperously  till  1829,  when  they  met  with  a 
severe  loss  by  the  burning  of  their  factory.  It  was  immediately  rebuilt, 
and  the  business  soon  became  more  extensive  and  flourishing  than  ever. 
In  1840,  S.  M.  Buckingham  and  Abram  Ives  became  interested  in  the 
button  business,  which  was  now  carried  on  under  the  name  of  Scovill  & 
Co.  J.  M.  L.  &  W.  H.  Scovill  continued  the  manufacture  of  rolled  brass 
and  plated  metal,  which  had  now  become  an  important  interest.  They 
also  associated  themselves  with  John  Buckingham,  under  the  name  of 
Scovills  &  Buclcingham,  in  the  making  of  patent  brass  butts,  the  busi- 
ness being  carried  on  at  the  place  now  owned  by  the  Oakville  Pin  Co., 
on  Steel's  Brook.  About  1842,  they  began  the  manufacture  of  Daguerre- 
otype plates,  and  soon  did  an  extensive  business  in  th<it  line.  In  Jan. 
1850,  a  joint  stock  company  was  formed  under  the  name  of  Scovill  Man- 
ufacturing Co.,  into  which  all  the  interests  named  above,  those  of  J.  M. 
L.  &  W.  II,  Scovill,  Scovills  &  Buckingham  and  Scovills  &  Co.,  were 
merged,  some  of  their  employees  being  admitted  as  stockholders.  The 
Scovills  owned  a  majority  of  the  stock.  The  capital  was  at  first 
$250,000.  It  is  now  l?300,000.  The  operations  of  the  company  have 
been  upon  a  large  scale  and  successful. 

The  present  manufacturing  interests  of  Waterbury  are  perhaps  more  in- 
debted to  Lamson  Scovill  than  to  any  other  man.  He  was  bold,  energetic 
and  sagacious.  He  had  enlarged  views  and  that  degree  of  confidence  in 
the  future  which  ensured  success.  So  soon  as  he  got  strength  of  his  own, 
he  was  ready  to  lend  assistance  to  others.  Many  enterprises  have  been 
carried  forward  to  a  successful  result  by  his  kindly  aid.  Not  only  his  . 
relations,  but  his  friends,  in  the  largest  sense,  shared  in  his  financial 
prosperity.  He  was  foremost  in  all  the  improvements  of  his  native  vil- 
lage. His  own  generous  impulses  he  did  not  hesitate  to  follow,  even 
when  indulgence  was  expensive.  He  was  a  large-hearted  man  with 
social,  kindly  feelings.  Few  persons  have  been  equally  respected  or 
more  beloved.  He  was  a  member  of  St.  John's  church,  of  which  he  was 
an  important  benefactor.  His  generosity  and  that  of  his  brother  Wil- 
liam founded  a  professorship  in  Washington  College,  which  is  named 
after  the  donors.  At  the  time  of  his  funeral,  the  factories,  stores  and 
public  places  of  the  city  were  closed,  and  the  countenances  of  the  citi- 
zens, assembled  in  large  numbers,  wore  an  aspect  of  honest  grief. 


APPENDIX.  431 


WILLIAM  HENRY  SCOVILL, 

A  younyer  brother  of  llie  preceding,  was  born  July  27,  1796.  His 
mother  was  Ahvthea,  the  daughter  of  Mitchel  Lamson  of  Woodbury,  a 
woman  of  excellent  character  and  superior  endowments,  who  died  a 
few  years  ago,  aged  about  80. 

Mr.  Scovill  spent  liis  early  life  at  home  on  the  farm  and  in  the  store 
of  his  father.  When  about  seventeen  years  of  age,  he  went  to  school 
at  the  Academy  in  Cheshire,  then  taught  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Bronson. 
He  was  there  in  the  winter  of  1812-13.  In  the  following  year,  he 
became  a  clerk  in  a  store  in  New  Haven,  first  in  the  employment  of  Mr. 
Brush,  and  then  in  that  of  Mr.  Peck.  When  about  20  years  of  age,  he 
returned  to  Waterbury  and  opened  a  store,  the  capital  being  furnished 
by  Mr.  Peck.  The  business  not  proving  successful,  it  was  abandoned 
after  two  years'  trial,  and  Mr.  Scovill  again  engaged  himself  as  a  clerk 
to  his  uncle,  William  K.  Lawson,  of  Berwick,  Pennsylvania,  in  whose 
employment  he  remained  about  two  years.  The  next  year,  after  leaving 
Berwick,  he  went  into  trade  on  his  own  account  at  a  place  called 
Turner's  Cross  Roads,  near  the  Roanoke,  in  North  Carolina,  where,  in 
addition  to  the  usual  articles  of  a  country  store,  he  dealt  somewhat  in 
cotton.  Here  he  remained  several  years,  and  accumulated  five  or  "six 
thousand  dollars.  In  1827,  he  visited  Waterbury  and  made  an  en- 
gagement with  his  elder  brother,  J.  M.  L.  Scovill,  to  become  his  partner 
in  the  business  of  manufacturing  metal  buttons. 

On  the  2d  day  of  July,  1827,  Mr.  Scovill  was  married  at  Black  Lake, 
near  Ogdensburgh,  N.  Y.,  to  Eunice  Ruth  Davies,  daughter  of  Hon. 
Thomas  J.  Davies.  By  this  marriage  he  had  four  children,  two  of 
whom  still  survive,  Mrs.  F.  J.  Kingsbury  of  Waterbury  and  Mrs.  Curtis 
of  New  York  City.  Mrs.  Scovill,  a  woman  of  many  virtues,  of  uncom- 
mon intelligence  and  great  force  of  character,  died,  much  lamented,  of 
pulmonary  consumption,  Nov.  25,  1839. 

Mr.  Scovill  was  again  married,  March  2 2d,  1841,  to  Rebecca  H. 
Smith,  second  daughter  of  Hon.  Nathan  Smith,  deceased,  of  New  Haven, 
by  whom  he  had  three  children,  one  of  whom,  a  son,  still  survives.  He 
died  at  Charleston,  S.  C,  whither  he  had  gone  for  the  recovery  of  his 
health,  (which  had  been  for  several  months  declining,)  March  27,  1854. 
His  second  wife  died  the  4th  day  of  August  following. 

Mr.  Scovill,  for  many  years  before  his  death,  filled  a  large  space  and 
exercised  a  wide  influence,  in  the  community  in  Avhich  he  lived.  He 
was  a  sagacious  business  man  of  comprehensive  views,  who  assisted  his 
brother  in  conducting  one  of  the  most  extensive  and  prosperous  man- 


432  HISTORY   OF   WATERBUET. 

ufacturing  establishments  in  Waterbuiy.  He  was  a  man  of  intelligence, 
of  generous  sj'mpatliies  and  inflexible  principle.  His  wealth  he  dis- 
tributed with  a  free -hand  in  the  way  of  both  public  and  private  charity. 
To  every  good  cause,  he  was  ready  to  give  material  aid.  He  was  em- 
phatically a  public  benefactor,  and  his  loss  was  a  public  calamity.  He 
was  one  of  the  most  active  and  influential  members  of  St.  John's 
church,  Waterbury  ;  was  senior  warden  for  many  years,  and  was  among 
the  foremost  in  the  work  of  erecting  the  beautiful  edifice  in  which  the 
society  now  worship.  Throughout  the  State,  he  was  known  as  the 
liberal  patron  of  the  church  and  its  institutions. 

Mr.  Scovill  was  not  less  distinguished  for  his  social  and  private  than 
for  his  public  virtues.  At  his  own  fireside,  in  the  bosom  of  his  family, 
among  his  intimate  friends  and  in  all  the  most  sacred  relations  of  life, 
he  was  faithful,  affectionate  and  true. 

JUNIUS  SMITH,  LL.  D., 

The  third  son  of  Major-General  David  Smith,  (a  major  in  the  Revolu- 
tion,) was  born  in  Watertown,  Northbury  Parish,  Oct.  2,  1780.  He 
graduated  at  Yale  College  in  1802,  studied  law  in  the  Law  School  in 
Litchfield,  and  settled  as  a  lawyer  in  New  Haven.  In  1805,  he  had 
occasion  to  go  to  London  on  business,  and  being  detained  beyond  his 
expectations,  engaged  in  commerce,  maintaining  his  connection  with 
Tallraadge,  Smith  &  Co.,  of  New  York.  In  1810,  he  visited  his  friends 
in  this  country,  but  soon  returned.  On  the  9th  of  April,  1812,  he 
married  Sarah  Allen,  the  daughter  of  Thomas  Allen,  Esq.,  of  Hudders- 
field,  Yorkshire.* 

Mr.  Smith  continued  his  mercantile  pursuits  with  varied  success,  till 
1832.  He  then  interested  himself  in  the  great  cause  of  Transatlantic 
Steam  Navigation,  in  connection  with  which,  his  name  has  become 
widely  celebrated.  He  sailed  for  New  York  in  August,  his  thoughts 
intently  occupied  with  the  subject.  He  became  convinced  that  the 
Atlantic  could  be  traversed  by  steam,  and  when  he  arrived  at  New 
York,  endeavored  to  awaken  an  interest  in  his  plans  among  merchants 
and  others.  He  was  met  by  a  smile  of  incredulity,  and  returned  to 
London  in  Dec.  (1832.)  Here  he  first  applied  to  the  London  and  Ed- 
inburgh Steam  Navigation  Company,  whose  steam  vessels  were  the 
largest  afloat,  and  tried  to  enlist  it  in  his  undertaking.  Failing  in  this, 
he  made  efforts  to   find  and  charter  a   vessel  for  an  experimental  trip, 

*  See  Kilbourne's  Biographical  History  of  Litchfield   County,  &c.,  a    work  of  which  I  have 
made  free  use  in  the  preparation  of  this  sketch. 


'Q 


APPENDIX.  433 

but  met  with  no  success.  He  then  began  to  consider  whether  he 
could  not  compass  his  object  by  the  formation  of  a  joint-stock  company 
for  the  purpose  of  constructing  steamships  for  Atlantic  navigation.  On 
the  first  of  June,  1835,  a  prospectus  of  a  company  proposing  a  capital 
of  £100,000  was  issued,  in  his  own  name,  and  widely  distributed,  at 
considerable  expense,  among  the  London  merchants,  particularly  those 
engaged  in  the  New  York  trade.  A  very  few  regarded  the  plan  with 
favor;  but  generally  it  was  made  the  subject  of  gibes  and  jeers.  Its 
author  was  ridiculed  as  a  visionary.  Men  of  science  regarded  the  en- 
terprise with  incredulity,  and  declared  that  it  must  fail  as  a  practical 
thing.  No  steamer,  they  said,  could  survive  those  terrible  storms 
which  sweep  the  Atlantic.  The  result  was,  as  might  have  been  foreseen, 
and  as  Mr.  Smith  himself  apprehended,  "not  a  single  share  was  taken." 
Men  of  capital  are  slow  to  embark  their  means  in  untried  experiments. 
Were  it  not  so,  they  would  soon  cease  to  be  capitalists.  This  habitual 
caution  (conservatism)  of  wealth  may  retard,  but  will  not  prevent  the 
birth  of  discovery  and  improvement. 

Mr.  Smith,  nothing  daunted,  now  revised  his  prospectus,  raised  the 
capital  to  £500,000  and  named  the  association  The  British  and  Ameri- 
can Steam  Navigation  Company.  But  he  could  get  nobody  to  stand 
as  directors.  At  length,  however,  after  numerous  and  various 
discouragements,  such  as  would  have  disheartened  ordinary  men,  a 
company  was  organized  with  eleven  directors,  (Mr.  Smith  one  of  them,) 
with  Isaac  Solb}^  Esq.,  for  chairman.  The  capital  was  increased  to 
£1,000,000,  and  subscribers  were  readily  obtained.  It  was  proposed  to 
cross  the  Atlantic  in  fifteen  days.  In  July,  1836,  the  company  adver- 
tised for  proposals,  and  in  September  a  contract  was  made  with  some 
ship  builder  to  construct  a  steamer  of  2016  tons,  the  keel  of  which 
was  laid  April  1st,  183Y.  It  was  afterwards  called  the  British  Queen. 
But  there  was  delay  in  getting  in  the  boilers,  and  the  Sirius,  of  about 
700  tons,  was  chartered  to  take  her  place.  The  latter  sailed  from  Cork 
on  the  4th  of  April,  1838,  and  arrived  in  New  York  on  the  morning  of 
the  23d.  She  was  the  first  vessel  that  steamed  her  way  across  the  At- 
lantic. It  is  true,  the  steamer  Savannah,  sailing  from  Savannah,  Geor- 
gia, had  performed  the  voyage,  in  1819  ;  but  steam  Avas  used  only 
when  sails  could  not  be  employed.  As  a  practical  thing,  the  great 
question  of  Transatlantic  Steam  Navigation  was  solved  by  the  persevering 
eftorts  and  dauntless  energy  of  Mr.  Smith.  If  he  is  not,  in  strictness, 
entitled  to  the  name  of  a  discoverer,  he  merits  little  less.  He  saw, 
more  clearly  than  others,  the  bearing  of  certain  great  scientific  truths, 
and  was  the  first  to  turn  them  to  practical  account. 

On  the  afternoon  of  the  same  day  that  the  Sirius  reached  New  York, 
28 


434  HISTORY  OF  waterbury. 

the  Great  Western,  of  1340  tons,  arrived  ;  having  sailed  from  Bristol, 
April  7th.  The  appearance  of  these  two  steamships,  at  about  the  same 
time,  from  another  continent,  was  the  cause  of  the  most  lively  and  ex- 
citing demonstrations.  Subsequently,  (July,  1839,)  Mr.  Smith  himself 
embarked  from  London,  in  the  British  Queen,  and  was  received  in  New 
York  with  hearty  congratulations.  Soon  after,  he  received  the  honorary 
degree  of  Doctor  of  Laws  from  Yale  College,  and  was  made  the  presi- 
dent of  his  company. 

Having  secured  one  great  object  of  his  ambition,  Mr.  Smith  turned 
his  attention  in  a  new  direction.  He  had  visited  China  and  made 
himself  familiar  with  the  Tea  plant,  its  habits,  mode  of  cultivation,  &c. 
He  satisfied  himself  that  it  would  grow  and  thrive  in  his  native  coun- 
try, and  resolved  to  make  the  experiment.  He  purchased  an  extensive 
plantation,  in  all  respects  favorable  to  his  object,  in  Greenville,  South 
Carolina,  and  began  the  work,  which  he  prosecuted  for  the  several  re- 
maining years  of  his  life.  His  immediate  purpose  was  to  propagate 
and  naturalize  the  plant,  and  he  supposed  he  had  succeeded;  but  his 
illness  and  death,  and  the  subsequent  neglect  of  his  plantation,  put  an 
end  to  the  hopes  of  those  who  had  watched,  with  the  greatest  interest, 
the  progress  of  the  undertaking.  He  died  in  Astoria,  N.  Y.,  Jan.  23, 
1853,  from  the  eff'ects  of  an  injury  which  he  had  received  a  year  before. 
His  wife  had  died  previously,  (1836.)  He  had  one  child,  a  daughter, 
(now  deceased,)  who  married  the  Ptcv.  Edward  Knight  Maddox,  an 
English  clergyman  of  the  Church  of  England. 

Capt.  DANIEL  SOUTHMAYD 
Was  the  son  of  the  Rev.  John  Southmayd,  and  was  born  April  19, 
1*717.  He  received  a  liberal  education  at  Yale  College,  and  was  gradu- 
ated in  1741.  On  leaving  college,  he  returned  to  his  native  village,  and 
gave  his  attention  to  farming  and  public  business.  He  became  a 
selectman,  a  moderator  of  town  meetings,  a  captain  of  militia,  a  justice 
of  the  peace,  &c.  For  eight  sessions,  beginning  Avith  1751,  he  was  a 
representative  to  the  General  Assembly.  He  was  much  beloved  for  the 
qualities  of  his  heart,  and  greatly  respected  for  soundness  of  mind  and 
force  of  character.  He  was  vastly  popular,  and  in  the  opinion  of  his 
contemporaries  and  immediate  successors,  had  extraordinary  talents. 
Long  after  his  decease,  it  was  a  common  remark  that  he  was  the  great- 
est man  ever  born  or  reared  in  Waterbury.  At  the  time  of  his  death, 
Mr.  Leavenworth  preached  a  funeral  discourse  ;  and  such  was  the  com- 
bined effect  of  the  sermon,  the  occasion  and  the  theme,  that  the  whole 
congregation  were  thrown  into  tears.* 

*  B.  Bronson's  MSS. 


APPENDIX.  435 

Mr.  Soutlimayd  died  Jan.  12,  1754.  lie  had  married,  March  24, 
1V49,  Hannah,  daughter  of  Samuel  Brown,  who  bore  him  three  children. 
The  widow  married  Gen.  Spencer  of  East  Haddam. 

SAMUEL  W.  SOUTHMAYD 

Was  the  eldest  son  of  Samuel,  the  grandson  of  John,  (the  constable,)  and 
the  great  grandson  of  the  Rev.  John  Southmayd,  and  was  born  in  West- 
bury,  Sept.  1773.  His  mother's  name  was  Dorcas  Skinner.  He  made 
choice  of  the  legal  profession,  pursued  his  studies  at  the  Law  School  in 
Litchfield,  under  Judge  Reeve,  was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  1795,*  and 
settled  in  Watertown.  He  had  not  the  advantages  of  an  academical 
education  ;  nor  had  he  the  disadvantages  too  often  arising  from  the  se- 
clusion, the  inexperience,  the  constraints  and  artificial  methods  of  a  col- 
lege life.  He  was  a  self-made  man,  as  all  men  of  unusual  intellectual  pro- 
portions are.    Mere  literature  comes  of  good  schooling,'^but  not  greatness. 

Mr.  Southmayd  soon  rose  to  eminence  in  his  profession.  At  the  bar, 
he  was  considered  as  a  man  of  rare  talents.  But  he  was  unusually 
modest,  and  before  a  court,  his  diffidence  sometimes  interfered  with  his 
success  as  an  advocate. 

Out  of  his  profession,  Mr.  Southmayd  had,  to  an  unusual  degree,  the 
respect,  the  confidence  and  the  friendship  of  his  acquaintance.  He  was 
known  for  his  equanimity  of  temper  and  kindness  of  heart.  To  his  near 
friends,  he  was  greatly  endeared.  To  his  clients,  he  gave  excellent 
counsel.  He  never  encouraged  litigation,  but  used  his  influence  to  re- 
store peace  when  it  had  been  broken,  and  perpetuate  friendship.  He 
was  much  engaged  in  public  life,  and  represented  his  town  seventeen 
times  in  the  Legislature.  Li  1809,  he  received  from  Yale  College  the 
honorary  degree  of  A.  M.  He  died  in  early  manhood,  greatly  lamented, 
March  4,  1813.  The  writer  well  remembers  the  time  when  his  death 
was  announced  in  Waterbury,  and  the  signs  of  grief  which  followed. 

ELI  TERRY, 

The  fifth  in  descent  from  Samuel  Terry,  who  came  to  some  part  of 
ancient  Springfield,  (Mass.,)  in  1G54,  was  born  in  East  Windsor,  now 
South  Windsor,  April  13,  1772.  Samuel  Terry,  1st,  married  Anne 
Lobdell  in  1660,  and  had  a  son,  Samuel,  who  settled  in  Enfield,  in  this 
State.  The  latter,  Samuel,  2d,  married,  in  1682,  Hannah  Morgan,  and 
afterwards  Martha  Credan.  By  the  first  marriage,  he  had  Samuel  and 
Ebenezer  ;  and  by  the  second,  Benjamin,  Ephraim,  Jacob,  Jonathan  and 
Isaac.  The  son  Ephraim  (born  1701)  married  Anne  Collins,  and  had 
Samuel,  Ephraim,  Nathaniel,  Elijah,  Eliphalet.      Samuel,  the  third  of 

*  stated  on  the  authority  of  the  late  Asa  Bacon  of  New  Haven. 


436  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

that  name,  son  of  Ephraim,  was  born  in  1725,  married  Mary  Kellog,  and 
liad  Samuel,  Alice,  Mary,  Aseph,  Rhoda,  Levi,  Solomon,  Sybil,  Ezekiel. 
Samuel,  4tli,  (born  1750,)  married  Iluldali  Burnham,  and  had  Eli,  Sam- 
uel, Silas,  Huldah,  Lucy,  Anne,  Naomi,  Horace,  Clarissa,  Joseph. 

Mr.  Terry  was  instructed  in  the  business  of  clock  making  and  watch 
repairing  by  Daniel  Burnap*  of  East  Windsor  and  a  Mr.  Cheeney  of 
East  Hartford,  He  interested  himself  in  the  arts  and  sciences  which 
have  a  bearing  on  the  construction  of  instruments  for  measuring  time. 
He  read  the  standard  works  on  astronomy,  natural  philosophy  and 
chemistry,  (then  a  new  science.)  He  kept  up  his  acquaintance  with 
these  subjects  till  late  in  life,  reading  the  modern  treatises  on  their  first 
appearance.  He  knew  more  of  them  than  is  usually  known  by  gradi;- 
ates  of  colleges.  His  attention,  however,  was  principally  confined  to 
those  points  which  had  a  practical  relation  to  his  business. 

Mr.  Terry  came  to  Plymouth  (then  Watertown,  Northbury  parish) 
on  the  first  Monday  of  Sept.  1793,  and  set  up  the  business  of  clock  mak- 
ing. Around  him,  Timothy  Barnes  of  Litchfield,  South  Farms,  James 
Harrison  of  Waterbury,  and  Gideon  Roberts  of  Bristol,  were  already 
known  as  clock  makers.  The  price  of  a  wooden  clock,  with  a  long  pen- 
dulum, at  that  time,  was  £4,  or  $13.33.  If  it  had  a  brass  dial  and  a  dial 
for  seconds  and  the  moon's  age,  the  price  was  $25.  Brass  clocks  brought 
more — from  £10  to  £15,  without  a  case. 

Mr.  Terry  made  clocks  both  of  wood  aud  brass  in  the  then  ordinary  way,  hav- 
ing a  hand  engine  for  cutting  the  teeth  or  cogs  of  the  wheels  or  pinions,  and 
using  a  foot  lathe  for  doing  the  turning.  It  is  probable  he  used  a  kuife,  as  well 
as  many  other  tools  then  in  use,  in  doing  some  part  of  the  work ;  but  that  the 
different  parts  of  the  clock  "  were  cut  out  with  the  penknife  "  is  a  tale  of  many 
years'  growth,  having  no  foundation,  and  ought  not  to  be  stereotyped  as  part  of 
the  history  of  clock  making  in  this  country.  So  limited  was  the  demand  for 
clocks  at  this  time,  and  so  inadequate  his  means  for  making  them,  that  after  fin- 
ishing three  or  four  he  was  obliged  to  go  out  with  them  on  horseback,  and  put 
them  up  where  they  had  previously  been  engaged  or  soki.  His  usual  way  was  to 
put  one  forward  of  the  saddle  on  which  he  rode,  one  behind,  and  one  on  each 
side  in  his  portmanteau.  During  this  day  of  small  things,  however,  there  was  an 
attempt  at  something  more.  As  early  as  the  year  1797,  he  procured  a  patent  for 
what  he  then  supposed  to  be  an  important  improvement  in  clocks.  This  patent 
was  for  a  new  construction  of  an  equation  clock,  showing  the  difference  between 
the  mean  and  apparent  time.  The  patent  is  now  in  the  possession  of  the  writer, 
as  executor  of  his  estate.  *  *  *  This  invention  proved  to  be  a  useful  one  to 
him  in  no  way  save  the  discipline  he  acquired  by  it ;  for  the  secret  in  money-mak- 

*  Mr.  Burnap  was  the  maker  of  some  of  the  best  American  clocks.  Some  of  them  are  met 
with  even  now,  said  to  be  seventy  years  old,  of  excellent  quality,  not  inferior  to  the  best  English 
clocks,  and  far  better  than  many  that  are  made  at  this  day,  with  a  more  costly  exterior. 


APPENDIX.  437 

ing  at  that  time,  as  well  as  at  the  present  day,  was  in  not  manufacturing  so  ex- 
pensive clocks  as  this  kind  must  necessarily  have  been.  The  greater  demand  was, 
and  still  is,  for  a  less  costly  article. 

The  business  was  prosecuted  by  him  in  this  old  way  until  about  the  year  1802 
or  1803,  when,  finding  he  could  sell  his  clocks  without  being  an  itinerant  himself, 
he  made  provision  for  manufacturing  them  more  extensively.  He  erected  a  small 
building  on  a  small  stream,  [half  a  mile  west  of  the  central  Congregational  church,] 
where  he  had  the  benefit  of  water  power  and  additional  machinery  for  doing  some 
portion  of  the  work.  At  this  time,  he  made  arrangements  for  manufacturing 
clocks  by  the  thousand.  It  was  regarded  by  some  at  the  time  as  so  extravagant 
an  undertaking  as  to  subject  him  to  considerable  ridicule.  A  conceited  wag  of 
the  town  offered  to  become  the  purchaser  of  the  last  one  of  the  thousand,  thinking 
he  would  never  be  able  to  finish  that  number.  The  clocks,  however,  were  soon 
finished. 

We  come  now  to  the  era  when  the  grist  mill,  four  miles  south  of  the  central  vil- 
lage, was  converted  into  a  factory  for  making  clocks.  At  this  place,  Mr.  Terry,  in 
1807-8,  made  still  more  extensive  arrangements  for  the  business.  He  had  obtained 
a  contract  with  the  Rev.  Edward  Porter,  a  Congregational  minister  and  ex-pastor 
of  the  Congregational  church  and  society  of  Waterbury,  and  Levi  Porter,  his  part- 
ner, for  making  four  thousand  clocks.  It  took  a  considerable  part  of  the  first 
year  to  fit  up  the  machinery,  most  of  the  second  year  to  finish  the  first  thousand 
clocks,  and  the  third  to  complete  the  remaining  three  thousand.  The  success  at- 
tending this  enterprise  was  such  as  to  give  a  new  impulse  to  clock  manufacturing  as 
a  money-making  business,  and  was  so  successfully  brought  to  a  close  that  the  idea 
of  retiring  from  business  was  entertained,  although  he  was  still  a  young  man.  He 
accordingly  sold  the  factory,  machinery  and  other  property  there,  to  Messrs. 
Seth  Thomas  and  Silas  Hoadley,  who  had  been  employed  during  the  three  years 
in  making  these  clocks,  and  then  removed  to  his  former  residence,  in  the  central 
part  of  the  town.  The  business  had  at  this  time  been  commenced  in  Winsted  by 
William  Hoadley,  and  had  been  revived  in  Bristol,  Waterbury  and  elsewhere. 
Asa  Hopkins,  a  man  residing  in  the  parish  of  Northfield,  town  of  Litchfield,  had 
erected  a  factory  on  the  Naugatuck  River.  This  Mr.  Hopkins  was  a  man  of  con- 
siderable mechanical  skill  and  a  successful  manufacturer  of  clocks.  He  obtained 
a  patent,  about  the  year  1813  or  1814,  on  a  machine  for  cutting  the  cogs  or  teeth 
of  the  wheels.  This  invention  or  improvement  was  for  the  use  and  introduction 
of  three  arbors  or  mandrels,  by  means  of  which  one  row  of  teeth  on  a  number  of 
wheels  was  finished  by  one  operation — a  machine  still  in  use,  although  superseded 
at  the  time  by  the  construction  of  an  engine  by  Mr.  Terry,  with  only  one  mandrel, 
which  was  used  for  many  years  afterwards,  and  has  not  been  abandoned  to  this  day. 
Messrs.  Thomas  and  Hoadley  prosecuted  the  business  as  partners  for  three  years 
or  more,  when  they  dissolved,  Mr.  Hoadley  retaining  the  factory  and  other  proper- 
ty, and  which  he  still  improves.  Heman  Clark,  who  had  been  an  apprentice  to 
Mr.  Terry,  built  a  factory  about  the  year  1811,  in  the  place  now  known  as  Ply- 
mouth Hollow,  where  he  pursued  the  business  two  or  more  years.  Mr.  Thomas 
purchased  this  factory,  Dec.  1813,  where  he  again  embarked  in  this  calling,  and 
where  he  has  been  eminently  successful  in  making  clocks,  and  is  at  this  time,  at  an 
advanced  age  in  life,  extensively  engaged  in  this  and  other  business.  Mr.  Hoadley 
has  done  less  business,  but  has  been  successful,  and  more  so  than  many  who  subse- 
quently engaged  in  this  occupation. 


438  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUEY. 

[Mr.  Terry  commenced  manufacturing  on  the  Naugatuck  in  1813  and  1814,  at 
the  old  place  known  as  "  SutlifiF' s  Mills,"  but  owned  by  Miles  Morse  at  the  time  of 
the  purchase.] 

In  1814,  the  short  or  shelf  clock  was  devised,  made  and  introduced  by  Mr. 
Terry,  who  had  then  removed  to  a  site  on  the  Naugatuck  River,  where  he  com- 
menced the  making  of  these  clocks ;  Mr.  Thomas  being  then  engaged  in  making 
the  common  or  old-fashioned  clocks,  and  also,  to  some  extent,  the  new  shelf  or 
mantle  clock.  A  patent  was  procured  for  this  improvement  in  clocks,  by  Mr. 
Terry  in  1816.  For  a  few  years  from  this  time,  the  old  or  long  clocks  were  made 
by  Mr.  Thomas  and  others,  but  gradually  the  sales  declined,  as  the  demand  in- 
creased for  the  others.  The  patent  was  a  source  of  no  Httle  trouble,  strife  and 
litigation.  Patents  were  not  unfrequently  granted  at  that  time,  with  very  imper- 
fect specifications,  the  inventors  not  being  aware  of  the  importance  of  an  exact 
definition  of  their  claims,  independent  of  a  general  description.  An  inventor, 
however  meritorious,  could  be  easily  deprived  of  his  just  rights.  A  patentee  needed 
a  more  thorough  acquaintance  with  the  laws  relating  to  patents  than  with  anything 
pertaining  to  the  art  or  improvement  which  might  be  the  subject  of  his  patent. 
So  far  as  the  writer  has  any  means  of  judging,  the  remark  holds  true  to  this  day. 
The  less  meritorious  are  as  likely  to  derive  pecuniary  benefit  from  a  monopoly 
of  this  kind,  as  the  most  deserving  inventor.  That  day  of  strife,  however,  has 
gone  by.  The  writer  was  familiar  with  all  the  difiiculties  and  conflicting  claims 
of  the  contending  parties,  and  knows  full  well  that  the  improvements  made 
by  Mr.  Terry,  at  this  time  and  subsequently,  marked  distinctly  a  new  era  in 
clock  making,  and  laid  the  foundation  for  a  lucrative  business  by  which  many 
have  gained  their  thousands,  however  unwilling  they  may  be  to  acknowledge  it. 
Some  of  the  important  improvements  which  should  have  been  secured  by  this 
patent,  are  in  use  to  this  day,  and  cannot  be  dispensed  with  in  the  making 
of  low-priced  clocks,  nor  indeed  any  convenient  mantle  clock.  The  mode  or 
method  of  escapement  universally  adopted  at  this  time,  in  all  common  shelf 
clocks,  was  his  plan  or  invention.  The  construction  of  the  clock  so  as  to  allow 
the  carrying  of  the  weights  each  side  of  the  movement  or  wheels  of  the  clock  to 
the  top  of  the  case,  bringing  the  pendulum,  crown-wheel  and  verge  in  front,  the 
dial-wheels  between  the  plates,  making  the  pendulum  accessible  by  removing  the 
dial  only,  was  his  arrangement  and  invention.  These  things  cannot  now  be  dis- 
pensed with,  even  in  the  clocks  driven  by  a  spring,  as  the  motive  power,  much 
more  in  those  carried  by  weights.  MiUions  of  them  have  been  made  during  the 
last  ten  years,  the  precise  model  in  these  particulars  of  the  one  now  in  possession 
of  one  of  his  family,  and  made  by  him  in  1814.  Xo  clock,  either  in  this  or  any 
foreign  country,  was  made  previous  to  this  time  with  the  weights  carried 
each  side  the  movement  the  whole  length  of  the  case ;  the  dial-wheels  inside  the 
plates,  the  pendulum,  crown-wheel,  verge  or  pallet  together  in  front  of  the  other 
wheels.  This  mode  of  escapement  is  one  of  great  value  still,  and  will  probably 
never  be  abandoned,  so  long  as  low-priced  clocks  are  needed.  It  is  true,  time- 
pieces of  a  small  size  were  imported  many  years  before.  It  is  also  true  that  time- 
pieces were  made  in  Boston  (Willard's  time-pieces)  and  are  made  to  this  day  with 
one  weight  back  of  the  movement,  and  moving  below  it ;  but  this  and  the  im- 
ported smaller  sized  article,  were  mere  time-pieces^  that  is,  were  destitute  of  the 
parts  striking  the  hour,  and  had  none  of  the  three  peculiarities  above  mentioned, 
so  universally  adopted  at  this  time. 


APPENDIX.  439 

Chauncey  Jerome  commenced  his  career  in  clock  making  at  a  later  period, 
gaining  his  first  knowledge  of  the  business  under  the  tuition  and  encouragement 
of  Mr.  Terry.  He  commenced  some  part  of  the  clock  business  in  Plymouth,  as 
early  as  the  year  1821.  He  afterwards  removed  to  Bristol,  where  he  embarked 
in  making  clocks,  introducing  clock-cases  of  different  sizes,  and  clocks  adapted  to 
the  new  form  of  cases  made.  At  a  still  later  period,  and  according  to  the  recol- 
lection of  the  writer,  not  far  from  the  year  1837,  he  introduced  or  did  much 
towards  the  introduction  of  the  most  common  form  of  the  brass  clock  now  in 
vogue.  The  pinion  leaves  or  cogs  are  made  of  round  wire.  This  is  a  cheap  way 
of  making  pinions,  never  before  practiced,  whatever  may  be  said  as  to  the  quality 
and  durabihty  of  the  clock  so  made.  The  present  form  of  the  brass  count-wheel, 
so  divided  as  to  allow  the  stop-dog  to  drop  between  the  teeth,  and  being  driven 
by  a  pin  in  the  fly-wheel,  Mr.  Jerome  claims  as  his  improvement,  for  which  he 
obtained  letters  patent. 

In  justice,  however,  it  should  here  be  stated,  that  certain  individuals  anterior  to, 
and  others  soon  after  the  period  Mr.  Jerome  commenced  business  in  Bristol,  em- 
barked in  this  occupation,  to  wit :  Mark  Leavenworth,  of  Waterbury  ;  Samuel  Terry 
(afterwards  of  Bristol)  and  Eli  Terry,  Jr.,  of  Plymouth;  Chauncey  Boardman,  Ives 
Brewster  and  others  of  Bristol ;  filling  the  market  with  a  great  variety  of  clocks, 
of  an  exterior  in  every  conceivable  form,  until  some  of  those  who  had  immedi- 
ately succeeded  Mr.  Terry  were  ready  to  abandon  the  business,  and  did  so  on 
account  of  the  very  reduced  price  of  clocks,  and  the  interminable  credit  it  was 
then  customary  to  give.  The  writer  was  one  of  this  number,  who  had  until 
then  very  little  acquaintance  with  any  other  business,  having  been  a  witness 
to  all  the  improvements  in  clocks  and  the  machinery  for  making  the  same,  from 
the  time  the  shelf-clock  was  first  introduced,  in  the  year  1814,  to  the  period  in 
question,  or  the  year  1836. 

[For  niivny  years  before  his  death,  Mr.  Terry  was  not  actively  engaged  in  busi- 
ness. Still,  he  never  abandoned  the  work-shop.  He  occupied  himself  in  making 
now  and  then  a]  church  clock,  a  few  watch  regulators,  and  the  like.  The  church 
clocks  were  made  in  three  parts,  independent  or  nearly  so,  the  connection  between 
each  being  such  as  not  to  be  injuriously  aflfected  by  the  other.  The  time-keeping 
part  was  of  the  ordinary  size,  and  moved  by  a  separate  weight.  The  striking 
part  was  moved  by  one  large  weight,  and  the  dial-wheels  by  another,  while  that 
of  the  time-keeping  part  weighed  only  three  or  four  pounds.  The  dial  wheels, 
hands  or  pointers,  moved  only  once  in  a  minute.  Church  clocks  constructed  in 
this  way  were  thus  rendered  as  perfect  time-keepers,  and  were  as  little  affected  by 
wind  or  storm,  as  any  house-clock  or  watch-regulator  could  be.  These  clocks 
were  made  with  compensation  pendulum  rods  of  his  own  design,  and  the  es- 
capement after  a  model  of  his  own.  During  these  years  of  comparative  leisure, 
his  time  was  mostly  spent  in  making  this  description  of  clocks,  chiefly  in  reference 
to  accuracy  as  time-keepers,  making  a  variety  of  regulators  with  new  forms  of 
escapements  and  compensation  rods.  No  year  elapsed  up  to  the  time  of  his  last 
sickness,  without  some  new  design  in  clock-work,  specimens  of  which  are  now 
abundant. 

[By  industry  and  prudent  management,  Mr.  Terry  accumulated  a  large  property. 
He  distributed  to]  his  family,  and  gave  away  to  different  objects  during  the  latter 
part  of  his  life,  not  less  than  one  hundred  thousand  dollars,  retaining  at  the  same 


440  HISTOEY    OF   WATEEBURT. 

time  an  amount  of  available  property  sufficient  to  afford  him  an  annual  income  of 
three  thousand  dollars.  This  he  regarded  as  sufficient  for  all  his  temporal  wants. 
When  commencing  business  in  early  life,  he  never  once  indulged  the  thought  of 
accumulating  one-tenth  the  amount. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  add  much  in  regard  to  clock-making,  as  it  is  prosecuted  at 
this  time.  It  is  scarcely  to  be  credited  that  half  a  miUion  of  shelf-clocks  are  now 
annually  made  in  Connecticut,  and  places  not  far  distant.  We  have  reason,  how- 
ever, to  believe  that  this  estimate  is  not  an  exaggeration. 

The  improvements  in  machinery,  and  the  skill  attained  in  manufocturing,  gradu- 
ally reduced  the  price  of  clocks.  Thus  it  is,  that  a  brass  clock  which  formerly 
cost  from  $38  to  $80  is  superseded  by  a  more  neat  and  convenient  shelf-clock, 
and  afforded  and  sold  at  the  very  low  price  of  $5,  $3  or  $2.  Some  may  suppose 
these  clocks  to  be  a  poorer  article  and  not  as  durable.  This  may  be  true  of  many 
of  the  clocks  now  manufactured  ;  still  it  is  equally  true,  that  a  clock  as  good  and 
durable  can  now  be  made  and  sold  at  a  profit,  at  these  low  prices.  What  is  true 
of  the  entire  clock,  is  well  illustrated  by  the  reduction  in  price  of  several  of 
the  separate  parts  of  the  clock,  as  now  made.  Such  parts  as  at  one  time  cost  ten, 
twenty,  or  even  fifty  cents,  to  each  clock,  are  now  manufactured  for  one-fourth 
the  amount,  and  in  some  instances  for  less  than  a  tithe  of  what  they  formerly 
cost.  Spring  clocks  are  made  more  extensively  than  they  were  a  few  years  since. 
The  springs  for  one  clock  that  cost,  only  six  or  seven  years  ago,  seventy-five 
cents  or  more,  are  now  made  and  sold  for  eight  and  seven  cents.  It  is  proper  to 
add  here,  that  this  description  of  springs  cannot  be  imported,  nor  is  the  secret  of 
manufacturing  them  known  in  foreign  countries.* 

Mr.  Terry  bad  not  the  advantages  of  an  early  education,  but  he  was 
a  man  of  strong  mind  and  sound  judgment.  Though  his  reading  did 
not  take  a  wide  range,  he  understood  his  business  thoroughly.  He 
was  a  plain,  practical  man,  and  esteemed  that  knowledge  of  most  ac- 
count which  had  a  direct  bearing  on  the  concerns  of  life,  or  which,  in 
other  words,  bore  fruit.  His  success  in  the  manufacture  of  clocks 
when  the  business  was  in  its  infancy,  and  the  important  mechanical  im- 
provements Avhich  he  introduced,  demonstrate  his  enterprise,  his  sagacity, 
his  inventive  genius.  Success  as  the  result  of  the  skillful  use  of  means 
and  the  powers  of  nature — persistant  success — always  proves  ability. 
Judged  by  this  standard,  Mr.  Terry  was  no  ordinary  man.  He  died, 
with  a  character  for  strict  integrity,  late  in  February,  1852.  His  man- 
ners were  blunt,  his  ways  peculiar  and  original,  but  he  had  the  confi- 
dence, respect  and  esteem  of  a  large  circle  of  acquaintances. 


*  Extracted  from  a  Review  of  Dr.  Alcott's  History  of  Clocli-maliing,  by   Henry  Terry,  pub- 
lished in  the  Waterbury  American,  June  10,  1853. 


APPENDIX.  441 


JOHN  TRUMBULL,  LL.  D., 

The  only  son  of  Rev.  Jobn  Trumbull,  was  born  in  Westbury,  April  13, 
(old  style,)  I'i'oO.*  Being  of  a  delicate  and  sickly  constitution,  he  was 
the  favorite  of  his  mother.  She  learned  him  to  read,  and  also  taught 
him  all  the  songs,  hymns,  and  other  verses  with  which  she  was  ac- 
quainted. He  discovered  an  extraordinary  memory  for  this  last  exercise, 
and  even  took  to  composing  verses  himself.  Unknown  to  any  body 
but  his  mother,  he  began  the  study  of  the  Latin  language,  and  soon 
made  great  proficiency.  During  all  this  time,  however,  he  was  a  boy 
and  liked  boyish  sports.  Mr.  Trumbull  smoked  and  raised  his  own 
tobacco.  One  day,  he  set  his  son  to  suckering  the  plant.  The  latter 
filled  his  hat  with  the  unsightly  worms  that  infest  the  tobacco,  and 
then  persuaded  his  little  sister  that  he  had  found  a  hen's  nest  on  the 
scaffold  in  the  barn,  and  could  not  get  down  with  the  eggs.  "  Parad- 
ing her  below  with  her  apron  spread,  he  let  fall  the  contents  of  his  hat. 
She  fainted.  The  father  was  soon  on  the  spot,  and  exclaimed,  '  now, 
John,  you  shall  be  whipped.'  '  Father,  father,'  cried  the  excited  ur- 
chin, '  I  deserve  it,  but  I  beg  you  will  not  whip  me  till  Madam  Pritchett 
is  gone.'"f  After  a  course  of  preparatory  study,  under  the  direction  of 
his  father,  the  two  started  on  a  horse  for  Yale  College,  the  boy,  of 
course,  behind.  The  latter,  says  the  Connecticut  Gazette  of  Sept.  24, 
1 757,  "  passed  a  good  examination,  although  but  little  more  than  seven 
years  of  age ;  but  on  account  of  his  youth  his  father  does  not  intend 
he  shall  at  present  continue  at  college."  After  an  interval  of  six  years 
spent  in  reading  Latin,  Greek  and  English  authors,  and  in  writing 
verses,  he  returned  to  New  Haven,  and  received  the  degree  of  Bachelor 
of  Arts  in  1767.  He  remained  as  a  resident  graduate  for  three  years 
longer,  devoting  his  time  to  polite  literature,  and  sometimes  to  less 
dignified  occupations.J  In  1771,  he  was  appointed  a  tutor,  which  posi- 
tion he  held  two  years.  It  was  during  his  connection  with  Yale  Col- 
lege that  his  acquaintance  with  D wight  and  Humphreys  commenced. 

In  1772,  Trumbull  published  the  firrt  part  of  "  The  Progress  of  Dull- 
ness;" and  in  the  following  year,  two  other  parts.     The  object  of  the 


*  His  birth  is  not  recorded  in  Waterbury. 

t  Dr.  McEwen's  Discourse,  published  in  the  proceedings  at  the  Centennial  Anniversary  in 
Litchfield,  1852. 

i  "  After  he  had  graduated,  at  the  age  of  sixteen,  [seventeen,]  being  small  of  stature,  he  was 
sometimes  seen  seated  in  the  road  with  other  children,  scraping  up  sand-hills  with  his  hands." 
(Dr.  McEwen's  Discourse.) 


442  niSTORT  OF  wateebitkt. 

poem  was  the  prevalent  metliod  of  education,  which  the  author  cen- 
sured and  ridiculed. 

Mr.  Trumbull  was  admitted  to  the  bar  in  Connecticut,  in  November, 
1773,  and  immediately  went  to  Boston  and  entered  the  office  of  John 
Adams,  afterwards  President  Adams.  Here  he  studied  law,  and  in  his 
leisure  hours  wrote  essays  on  political  subjects  for  the  gazettes.  He  be- 
came an  ardent  Whig;  published  without  his  name,  his  "Elegy  on  the 
Times ;"  returned  to  New  Haven,  and  commenced  the  practice  of  his 
profession  in  1774.  Here,  though  fully  occupied  as  a  lawyer,  he  found 
time,  at  the  solicitation  of  certain  members  of  the  Continental  Congress 
and  other  Whig  friends,  to  compose  and  publish  the  first  part  of  his 
most  celebrated  work,  "McFingal,"  a  burlesque  epic  poem.  He  de- 
signed it  as  a  satire  on  English  officials  and  Tories  in  general,  and  to 
help  prepare  the  way  for  the  independence  of  the  Colonies.  His 
business  in  New  Haven  was  broken  up  by  the  war,  and  an  invasion  of 
the  town  was  almost  constantly  apprehended.  He,  therefore,  removed 
in  May,  1777,  to  his  native  town,  where  he  remained  about  four  years. 
Here,  he  appears  to  have  lived  in  the  house  with  his  father,  and  to  have 
continued,  to  some  extent,  the  practice  of  his  profession.  He  had 
previously  married  (Nov.  1776)  the  daughter  of  Col.  Leverett  Hubbard 
of  New  Haven. 

In  1779,  he  was  chosen  by  the  town  one  of  the  "inspecting  com- 
mittee," whose  special  business  it  was  to  look  after  the  Tories  and 
all  "  inimical  persons,"  to  discover  their  plots,  and  to  inform  against 
them.  But,  at  length,  his  health  gave  way,  oAving  partly  to  the 
fatigue  and  exposure  of  attending  the  courts  at  a  distance ;  and  in 
June,  1781,  with  the  hope  of  improving  his  chances  of  recovery,  he 
removed  to  Hartford.  Soon  after,  he  finished,  and  in  1782,  publish- 
ed, an  edition  of  his  McFingal,  some  part  of  it,  tradition  says,  being 
written  in  the  old  Trumbull  house  in  Watertown.  He  also  became  a 
member  of  a  literary  club,  to  which  Col,  Humphreys,  Barlow  and  Dr. 
Lemuel  Hoj^kins  belonged,  which  met  weekly  for  the  discussion  of  in- 
teresting questions,  political,  philosophical  and  literary.  They  were 
called  the  "  Hartford  wits,"  and  after  the  peace  in  1783,  published  a 
series  of  essays,  called  "  American  Antiquities,"  pretending  to  be  ex- 
tracts from  an  ancient  poem  which  had  been  disinterred,  entitled  "  The 
Arnachiad."  These  papers  first  appeared  in  the  Hartford  and  New 
Haven  gazettes,  and  were  widely  circulated.  They  were  intended  to 
check  the  progress  of  disorder  and  a  sceptical  philosophy,  and  help 
prepare  the  way  for  a  more  stable  government. 

In  1789,  Mr.  Trumbull  was  appointed  State's  attorney  for  the  County 


APPENDIX.  443 

of  Hartford,  and  in  1*792,  represented  the  town  of  Hartford  in  the  Legis- 
lature. His  impaired  health  compelled  him  to  resign  the  office  of 
State's  attorney  in  1795,  and  to  retire  wholly  from  business.  A  severe 
and  dangerous  course  of  sickness  followed,  in  ]*fovember,  1798.  At 
length,  however,  he  was  able  to  resume  his  professional  life,  and  in  May, 
1800,  was  elected,  a  second  time.  State  representative.  In  the  follow- 
ing year,  he  was  chosen  a  judge  of  the  Superior  Court  of  the  State,  and 
in  1808,  was  made  a  judge  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  Errors.  He  re- 
mained in  office  till  he  was  "rotated"  out  of  it,  May,  1819,  a  new  con- 
stitution having  been  formed  and  a  new  party  installed  in  power.  In 
1818,  he  received  from  Yale  College  the  degree  of  LL.  D. 

Judge  Trumbull  was  esteemed  a  good  but  not  a  very  learned  or 
profound  judge.  The  dignity  of  his  office  did  not  always  repress 
his  wit  or  his  satirical  propensities.  An  advocate  from  the  eastern 
part  of  the  State  made  a  very  boisterous  speech.  After  it  was  over,  in 
some  miscellaneous  conversation,  he  remarked  to  the  court  that  his  case 
was  a  hard  one,  as  the  wind  and  tide  were  against  him.  "  I  don't  know 
how  it  is  with  the  tide,  but  the  ivind,  sir,  seems  to  be  in  your  favor,"  re- 
plied the  judge. 

Judge  Trumbull  remained  in  Hartford  till  1825,  when  be  removed  to 
Detroit,  and  resided  for  his  remaining  life  in  the  family  of  his  daughter, 
the  wife  of  Hon.  William  Woodbridge.     He  died  in  May,  1831. 

BENONI  UPSON,  D.  D. 

He  was  the  eldest  son  of  Thomas,  the  grandson  of  Thomas  and  the 
great  grandson  of  Stephen  Upson.  He  was  born  in  the  part  of  Water- 
bury  since  called  Wolcott,  Feb.  14,  1750  ;  was  graduated  at  Yale  Col- 
lege in  1776,  and  became  the  settled  minister  of  Kensington.  In  1809, 
he  was  made  a  Fellow  of  Yale  College,  became  a  member  of  the  Pru- 
dential Committee,  and  in  1817  received  the  degree  of  D.  1).  His 
death  took  place  Nov.  13,  182G. 

Dr.  Upson  was  considered  as  a  prudent,  safe  man,  without  brilliancy. 
He  was  known  for  his  urbanity  and  bospitality. 

STEPHEN  UPSON 

Was  the  only  son  and  child  (except  one  that  died  in  early  infancy)  of 
Capt.  Benjamin  Upson.  He  was  the  grandson  of  Benjamin,  the  great 
grandson  of  Stephen  and  the  great,  great  grandson  of  Stephen  Upson, 
the  original  planter,  and  was  born  in  the  "old  Clark  house,"  June  12, 
1  783.  His  mother,  before  marriage,  was  Mary  Clark,  the  widow  of  Thomas 
Clark,  (2d,)  and  daughter  of  Daniel  Hine  of  New  Milford.     He  pursued 


444  HISTOKT   OF   WATERBURY. 

liis  classical  studies,  for  a  time,  -with  Rev.  Mr.  Woodward  of  Wolcott. 
He  also  studied  with  Thomas  Lewis  of  Salem  society,  and  entered  Yale 
College.  While  he  was  a  student  there,  the  sea  of  politics  raged  vehe- 
mently. Those  in  authority  in  College,  and  particularly  the  President, 
were  strong  Federalists ;  and  it  was  considered  rash  for  a  young  man, 
who  expected  college  honors,  to  avow  republican  opinions.  Before  the 
close  of  his  junior  year,  young  Upson  embraced  these  opinions.  As  he 
had  already  received  many  honors  and  was  a  candidate  for  more,  his 
father  became  alarmed,  and  remonstrated  with  him  by  letter,  telling  him 
how  much  he  was  in  the  power  of  the  President,  and  how  unwise  it  was 
to  adopt  adverse  political  sentiments.  The  son  defended  his  views  at 
length,  also  by  letter.  One  of  his  epistles  is  before  me.  In  it,  he  ac- 
knowledges his  perilous  condition,  but  asks — "Do  you  wish  me  to  dis- 
semble the  real  sentiments  of  my  heart  for  the  paltry  reward  of  a  collegi- 
ate honor  ?"  &c.  Both  the  correspondents,  probably,  exaggerated  the 
danger  of  holding  the  proscribed  opinions. 

Mr.  Upson  graduated  in  1804,  having  for  classmates  John  C.  Cal- 
houn and  other  distinguished  men.  lie  commenced  the  study  of  law 
with  Judge  Chauncey  of  New  Haven  ;  but  feeling  the  necessity  of  earn- 
ing something  for  himself,  he  left  in  March,  1805,  and  went  to  Virginia. 
In  Richmond,  he  met  his  classmate  and  room-mate.  Royal  R.  Hinman, 
who  had  taken  charge  of  an  academy  in  that  city.  The  two  went  to- 
gether a  few  miles  north,  to  visit  Gen.  Guerrant,  who  had  advertised  for 
a  family  teacher.  Upson  made  an  engagement  for  six  months,  and  en- 
tered upon  his  duties  April  22d.  He  was  to  receive  £50  and  board, 
washing,  lodging,  &c.  When  the  six  months  had  expired,  he  entered  the 
family  of  Nathaniel  Pope,  Esq.,  a  distinguished  lawyer  of  Hanover,  (about, 
twenty  miles  from  Richmond,)  as  teacher.  He  engaged  for  one  year, 
and  was  to  receive  £90  and  board,  &c. ;  and  also  legal  instruction  and  the 
use  of  law  books.  Before  the  time  had  expired,  Mr.  Pope  was  killed  in 
a  duel,  and  Upson,  at  the  solicitation  of  his  friend  and  college  mate, 
Addin  Lewis,  then  living  there,  went  to  Georgia,  and  entered  the  law 
office  of  the  celebrated  William  H.  Crawford.  He  was  admitted  to  the 
bar  and  became  Mr.  Crawford's  law  partner.  His  connection  secured 
him  immediate  business,  and  he  rose  rapidly  to  the  highest  eminence  in 
his  profession. 

Mr.  Upson  interested  himself  in  the  politics  of  his  adopted  State. 
As  early  as  1808,  he  wrote  a  series  of  articles  which  were  published  in 
the  Georgia  Express,  and  republished  in  the  Savannah  Advertiser,  on  the 
stay  laws  just  enacted  in  that  State,  (made  necessary,  it  was  claimed, 
by  the  Embargo  laws  of  Congress,)  which  attracted  much  notice  at  the 


APPENDIX.  44:5 

time.  They  were  entitled  "  An  enquiry  into  the  constitutionality,  the 
necessity,  the  justice,  and  policy  of  the  Embargo  lately  laid  upon  Law 
in  this  State,"  and  were  signed  "  Lucius."  They  denounced,  in  un- 
measured terms,  the  obnoxious  laws  and  the  men  who  concocted  them, 
and  evince  a  good  deal  of  legal  knowledge  and  argumentative  force  for 
so  young  a  man.  In  1813,  alluding  to  some  recent  acts  of  the  Legisla- 
ture of  Georgia,  he  said,  in  a  letter  to  his  father,  that  the  country  "  ap- 
peared to  be  in  a  rapid  prog/ession  from  a  representative  republic  down 
the  grades  of  Democracy  to  a  perfect  state  of  anarchy." 

In  the  latter  part  of  his  life,  Mr.  Upson,  having  accumulated  consider- 
able property,  purchased  a  plantation  and  cultivated  wheat,  oats,  corn, 
&c.,  and  was  intending,  had  life  been  spared,  to  raise  cotton.  He  did 
not,  however,  neglect  his  profession.  Some  attention  he  continued  to 
give  to  politics,  and  became,  as  I  gather  from  his  letters,  a  member  of 
the  Legislature.  When  his  old  friend,  Mr.  Crawford,  came  to  be  talked 
of,  and  was  finally  nominated,  for  the  presidency,  he  gave  him  his 
hearty  support.  To  this  course  he  was  prompted,  not  only  by  friend- 
ship and  a  sense  of  gratitude,  but  by  a  belief  that  Mr.  C.  was  "eminently 
qualified  for  the  office."  Could  he  see  him  elected,  he  declared,  he 
should  "  be  perfectly  satisfied,  without  further  interference  in  political 
matters."  lie  became  famous  for  his  political  harangues,  and  had  the 
entire  confidence  of  the  Democratic  party;  and  at  the  critical  period  of 
his  death,  it  is  stated  that  his  party  had  settled  the  point  that  he  should 
be  the  next  senator  in  Congress,  to  be  chosen  by  the  Legislature  then 
about  to  meet. 

Mr.  Upson  married,  Nov.  12,  1813,  Hannah  Cummins,  the  youngest 
daughter  of  Rev.  Francis  Cummins  of  Georgia.  They  had  five  chil- 
dren, all  of  whom  survived  their  father,  viz,  Francis  Lewis,  (for  a  time 
a  member  of  the  Law  School  of  New  Haven,)  Mary  Elizabeth,  Sarah 
Eveline,  William  Benjamin  and  Stephen.  All  are  believed  to  be  now 
living,  except  Wm.  Benjamin.  Stephen,  the  youngest,  (born  Nov.  8, 
1823,)  graduated  at  Yale  College  in  1841,  and  is  now,  or  was  recently, 
in  New  York.  The  mother,  after  she  became  a  widow,  married  Elijah 
Boardman  of  Connecticut,  (then  of  New  York.)  After  Mr.  Boardmau's 
decease,  she  returned  to  the  South,  and  is  still  living. 

Mr.  Upson  resided  at  Lexington,  Oglethorpe  County,  Ga.,  and  died 
August  3,  1824,  aged  41.  He  had  acquired  more  reputation  as  an  ad- 
vocate, perhaps,  than  any  other  man  in  the  State,  of  his  age.  "  Had  he 
lived  ten  years  longer,"  says  one  of  his  admirers,  "  he  would  have  been 
the  great  man  of  the  Souths  He  was  a  fine  scholar,  an  arduous  stu- 
dent of  law,  an   elegant  and   persuasive  speaker,  and   a  high  minded, 


446  IIISTOKY    OF   WATEEBUKT. 

honorable  man.  He  had,  too,  a  large  and  kind  heart.  This  appears  in 
his  letters  to  his  parents,  and  to  his  sister  who  lived  with  them.  They 
are  full  of  anxious  solicitude  and  tender  feeling.  After  the  decease  of 
his  mother,  he,  for  the  first  time  since  he  left  Connecticut  in  1805, 
visited  his  ftither,  then  (July,  1821)  somewhat  infirm  with  age, 
and  made  the  most  liberal  provision  for  his  permanent  comfort. 
He  had  previously  made  his  friends  at  home,  to  a  large  extent,  the 
sharers  of  his  prosperity.  While  he  was  an  affectionate  son  and  broth- 
er, he  won  the  esteem  and  the  confidence  of  all  who  knew  him.  His 
form  was  good,  his  person  somewhat  tall  and  slender,  his  dress  and 
mode  of  living  plain,  and  his  manners  gentlemanly  and  agreeable. 

Capt.  JOHN  WELTON. 

He  was  the  eldest  son  of  Richard  Welton,  and  was  born  Jan.  1, 1727. 
He  was  a  farmer  of  Buckshill,  and  had  only  the  ordinary  advantages  of  an 
English  education ;  still  he  possessed  a  strong  mind  and  exerted  a  wide 
influence.  From  an  early  period,  he  was  a  prominent  member  of  the 
Episcopal  society  and  held  the  ofliice  of  senior  warden.  In  the  begin- 
ing  of  the  Revolutionary  war,  he  espoused  the  patriotic  cause,  became  a 
moderate  Whig,  and  was  confided  in  by  the  friends  of  colonial  inde- 
pendence. In  1784,  he  was  first  appointed  a  justice  of  the  peace.  He 
was  a  useful  and  much  respected  member  of  the  Legislature  fifteen  ses- 
sions, beginning  in  1784.  It  is  stated  that  when  he  arose  to  address 
the  house,  few  men  were  listened  to  with  more  deference. 

Esquire  John  Welton,  as  he  was  called,  died  Jan.  22,  1816. 

Rev.  BENJAMIN  WOOSTER 
Was  the  third  son  and  fourth  child  of  Wait  and  Phebe  (Warner) 
Wooster,  and  was  born  in  Waterbury,  Oct.  29,  1762.  He  was  a  sol- 
dier of  the  Revolution,  and  was  taxed  as  a  minor  in  the  first  society  in 
1782.  Subsequently,  he  entered  Yale  College  and  graduated  in  1790. 
His  theological  studies  were  pursued  under  the  Rev.  Dr.  Edwards  of 
New  Haven.  After  being  licensed  to  preach,  he  occupied  himself  for 
a  time  in  missionary  labor ;  but  in  1797,  was  ordained  pastor  of  the 
church  in  Cornwall,  Vt.  He  gave  up  his  charge  in  1802,  and  spent 
three  years  in  the  service  of  the  Berkshire  Missionary  Society.  On  the 
24th  day  of  July,  1805,  he  was  installed  in  Fairfield,  Vt,,  where  he 
labored  assiduously  till  bodily  infirmity,  in  1833,  compelled  him  to  de- 
sist. During  this  time,  he  was  once  a  representative  to  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  State,  and  twice  a  member  of  the  "Septennial  Conven- 
tion convened  by  the  Board  of  Censors."  He  died,  says  Dr.  Sprague's 
"Annuals,"  at  St.  Albans,  Vt.,  in  February,  1843. 


4A7 


|^"I  here,  contrary  to  my  original  purpose,  introduce  a  few  names  of  persons 
still  living.  The  very  brief  sketch  of  Mr.  Israel  Holmes  has  been  furnished  by  a 
friend  of  that  gentleman. 

AMOS  BRONSON  ALCOTT, 
Son  of  Joseph  C.  Alcott,  was  born  in  Wolcott,  Nov.  29,  1799.  He  is 
a  well  known  literary  man,  lecturer  and  "conversational  teacher." 
His  name  is  identified  with  Avhat  is  termed  the  transcendental  philoso- 
phy in  Massachusetts.  He  is  the  friend  of  Ralph  Waldo  Emerson,  and 
has  written  some  books  on  human  culture  and  his  favorite  philosophy. 
Boston  has  hitherto  been  his  home. 

Mr.  Alcott  was  married,  May  23, 1830,  to  Abigail,  youngest  daughter 
of  Col.  Joseph  May  of  Boston.  Samuel  Sewall,  chief  justice  of  the  Mas- 
sachusetts Colony  from  1718  to  1728,  was  the  ancestor  of  his  wife's 
mother,  Dorothy  Sewall. 

WILLIAM  A.  ALCOTT,  M.  D., 

Son  of  Obed  Alcott,  was  bora  in  Wolcott,  Oct,  6,  1798.  In  boyhood, 
he  attended  the  common  district  schools,  and  finally,  a  private  school 
for  two  terms.  Afterwards,  he  taught  a  district  school  for  several 
years.  Finally,  he  commenced  the  study  of  medicine,  and  after  three 
years,  or  in  1826,  received  at  New  Ilaven  a  license  to  practice.  He 
then  returned  to  teaching,  but  his  health  breaking  down,  he  became  a 
practitioner  of  medicine  in  Wolcott  till  1829.  Subsequently,  he  connect- 
ed himself  with  Mr.  Woodbridge,  the  geoprapher,  removed  to  Boston,  and 
devoted  his  time  to  the  cause  of  education  and  literary  pursuits.  In 
1832  he  went  to  Boston  and  soon  became  the  editor  of  the  "  Annals  of 
Education,"  &c. 

Dr.  Alcott  is  the  author  of  many  books  on  education,  temperance, 
moral  reform,  domestic  medicine,  &c.  Among  these  are  the  Young 
Man's  Guide,  House  I  Live  in,  The  Young  Mother,  The  Young  Wife, 
The  Young  Husband,  Young  Woman's  Guide,  The  Young  House- 
keeper and  Mother's  Medical  Guide.  He  has  also  written  largely  for 
the  periodicals,  and  has  edited  several  beside  the  Annals — Parley's  Mag- 
azine, Library  of  Health,  &c.  He  has  also  lectured  on  his  favorite  topics 
in  several  of  the  States.  Notwithstanding  his  severe  labors,  he  is,  in  his 
own  language,  "  a  water-drinker  and  a  bread  and  fruit-eater,  eschewing 
all  seasonings  and  mixed  dishes,  and  rejecting  all  medicines."  He 
is  now,  he  continues,  "in  his  thirty-second  year  of  respite  from  the 
grave  by  consumption,  of  which  he  has  always  had  a  dread,  with  which 
he  is  still  threatened,  and  to  which  some  day  he  will  fall  a  victim." 


448  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 


Dka.  AARON  BENEDICT, 

The  son  of  Aaron  and  Esther  (Trowbridge)  Benedict,  was  born  in  that 
part  of  Waterbury  which  is  now  Middlebury,  Aug.  9,  1785.  At  an  early 
age  he  becarna_ajmeinber_pf  Yale  Colleg'e,  but  after  .eighteen  months 
was  obliged  to  leave  on  account  of  ill  health.  He  removed  to  Wa- 
terbury (first  society)  in  1804,  and  became  a  partner  of  Joseph  Burton 
in  mercantile  business,  which  they  carried  on,  without  much  profit,  till 
1812.  He  then  commenced  tke  manufacture  of  bone  and  ivory  but- 
tons;, but  this  business,  after  several  years'  trial,  not  proving  satisfactory, 
he  became  connected  in  1823,  with  Bennet  Bronson  of  Waterbury,  and 
Nathan  Smith,  William  Bristol  and  David  C.  DeForest  of  New 
Haven,  in  the  gilt  button  business,  under  the  partnership  name  of  "  A. 
Benedict."  He  was  the  general  partner  and  had  the  exclusive  manage- 
ment of  the  concern.  The  prosperity  of  Waterbury,  as  a  manufactur- 
ing town,  may  be  said  to  date  from  the  formation  of  tliis  company ; 
though  the  gilt  button  business  had  been  established,  and  carried  on  to  a 
limited  extent  for  many  years.  The  capital  was  $6,500.  Many  dis- 
couragements, at  first,  embarrassed  the  enterprise ;  but  perseverance 
finally  secured  success.  Skillful  artisans  were  obtained  from  England. 
It  was  the  first  aim  to  make  a  good  article,  and  the  second,  to  obtain 
good  prices.  Buttons,  gilded  with  something  better  than  "  dandelion 
water,"  were  first  sent  to  market  in  the  spring  of  1824.  Goods  of  the 
value  of  about  $5,000  were  made  during  this  year.  Soon  after  the  for- 
mation of  the  company,  Benjamin  DeForest  of  Watertown  and  Alfred 
Piatt  of  Waterbury  became  members  by  purchase.  The  partnership 
was  renewed  in  1827,  and  the  capital  increased  to  $13,000. 

The  segond  partnership  expired  Feb.  2d,  1829,  when  a  new  one  was 
formed  under  the  name  of  "Benedict  &  Coe,"  with  a  capital  of  $20,000. 
Mr.  Benedict's  partners  were  Israel  Coe,  Bennet  Bronson,  Benjamin  De- 
Forest,  Alfred  Piatt  and  James  Croft.  In  addition  to  their  old  business, 
they  dealt  in  merchandise,  and  rolled  brass  for  market.  They  had  pre- 
viously, as  early  as  1825,  made  brass  for  their  own  use  and  sold  some, 
but  this  was  not  then  considered  an  important  branch  of  their  business. 
Thenceforth  it  became  so. 

Qn  flie  10th  day  of  February,  1834,  the  copartnership  of  Benedict 
&  Coe  expired,  and  a  new  one,  with  a  capital  of  $40,000,  was  enter- 
ed into,  with  the  name  of  Benedict  &  Burnham.  The  partners  .were 
Aaron  Benedict,  Gordon  W.  Burnham,  Bennet  Bronson,  Alfred  Piatt, 
Henry  Bronson,  Samuel  S.  DeForest  and  John   DeForest.     The    two 


APPENDIX.  449 

first  were  tlie^geiiexal^j^artners  and-ageats  .of  the  company.  Mr.  Bene, 
diet  continued  to  have  charge  of  the  business  at  home,  which  was  pros- 
ecuted with  great  energy  and  success  for  the  next  three  years.  By  his 
prudence  and  skill,  the  company  was  carried  through  the  financial 
crisis  of  1837,  without  dishonor  or  serious  loss.  The  copartnership  was 
renewed  March  16,  1838,  with  a  capital  of  $71,000,  and  again,  March 
11,  1840,  with  a  capital  of  $100,000.  Previous  to  this  last  date,  or  in 
1839,  the  second  financial  crisis  came  on,  which  was  followed  by  a  pro- 
longed depression  in  business.  The  company  made  nothing  for  three 
years. 

On  the  14th  day  of  Jan.  1843,  the  company  of  Benedict  &  Burn- 
hara  gave~^lace  to  the  "  Benedict  &  Burnham  Manufacturing  Com- 
pany," a_  joint  stock  corporation,  the  first  formed  in  the  town,  under 
which  name  the  business  is  still  carried  on.  The  capital  was  $100,000. 
Mr._.JBenedict_  was  chosen  presidejit,  which  office  he  has  held  ever 
since.  In  1848,  the  capital  was  augmented  to  $200,000,  and  in  1856, 
to  $400,000.  The  business  has  been  regularly  and  constantly  increas- 
ing, (with  slight  exceptions,)  from  1824  to  the  present  time.  The  mak- 
ing of  German,.,  silver  became  an  important  branch  of  it,  at  an  early 
period.  So  did  the  drawing  of  brass  and  copper  wire.  The  company 
now  manufactures  almost  exclusively,  sheet  brass,  German  silver,  brass 
and  copper  Avire,  and  brass  and  copper  tubing.  A  business  which  was 
started'^thirty-two  years  ago,  on  a  most  diminutive  scale,  has  now  be- 
Ci^nie  J,_h,e  mosl  important  in  the  place,  employing  six  first  class  mills 
and  over  $1,500,000  capital. 

The  Benedict  <fe  Burnham  Manufacturing  Company  has  from  time 

'jj^^time  become  the  parent  of  several  other  joint  stock  companies. 
Whenever  a  branch  of  its  business  could  be  better  carried  on  by  itself, 
the  property  necessary  for  its  prosecution  was  detached,  and  distributed 
as  a  dividend  to  its  stockholders,  in  the  form  of  stock  in  a  new  com- 

.^pany.  Thus  originated,  in  1846,  the  American  Pin  Company,  with 
$50,000  capital,*  (afterwards  increased  to  $100,000;)  in  1849,  tli© 
Waterbury  Button  Company,  with  a  capital  of  $30,000,  (afterwards  in- 
creased to  $45,000;)  in  1852^  the  Benedict  &  Scovilt  Company,f  (a 
mercantile  corporation,)  with  a  capital  of  $50,000,  (now,  00,000  ;)  and 
in  I857j  the  Waterbury  Clock  Company,  with  $60,000  capital. 

■  Mr.  Benedict  has  twice  represented  the  town  in  the  General  Assembly, 

and  in  the  spring  of  the  present  year,  (1857,)  was  a  candidate  for  State 

*  The  partners  in  the  Arm  of  Brown  &  Elton  took  one  half  tha.5tacJj,icuthis_company.    They 
had  previousiy'heen  interested  in  the  business. 
t  The  stockholders  of  the  Scovill  Manufacturing  Co.  took  one  third  of  the  stock. 

29 


450  HISTOEY   OF   WATEEBUEY. 

senator ;  but,  as  a  common  thing,  he  has  peremptorily  declined  political 
oflSce.  For  many  years,  he  has  been  a  deacon  of  the  1st  Congregational 
church  of  Waterbury.  He  is  widely  known  for  integrity,  soundness  of 
judgment  and  strong  common  sense  ;  for  his  matured  opinions  and  wise, 
considerate  action,  under  all  circumstances.  Though  now  over  seventy 
years  of  age,  he  is  still  vigorous,  and  attends  to  his  business  duties  with 
as  much  regularity  as  he  did  thirty  years  ago. 

BIOGEAPHICAL  MEMOIR  OF  ALVAN  BRONSON  ; 

PREPAKED    BY    HIMSELF. 

I  am  the  second  son  of  Josiah  and  Tabitha  (Tuttle)  Bronson,  and  was 
born  in  Waterbury,  (since  Middlebury,)  May  19,  1783.  As  soon  as  I 
could  be  made  useful,  I  worked  on  the  farm  in  the  summer,  attending  a 
district  school  in  the  winter.  "When  thirteen  years  old,  I  spent  twelve 
months  in  the  family  of  Capt.  Isaac  Bronson,  being  engaged  as  shop  or 
errand  boy  in  a  small  country  store.  About  this  time,  I  became  inter- 
ested in  a  small  juvenile  library,  and  contracted  a  fondness  for  books.  I 
was  kindly  treated  by  Capt.  Bronson,  who  by  the  way,  though  in  hum- 
ble life,  was  no  ordinary  man.  He  had  a  strong  mind,  well  cultivated 
for  his  station;  was  benevolent,  ardent,  eloquent.  In  politics,  he  was  a 
warm  Federalist.  I  recollect  bearing  him  say,  witb  bands  clenched, 
his  massive,  bony  figure  drawn  up  to  its  full  height,  his  musical,  bell- 
toned  voice  pitched  to  its  highest  key,  "  I  solemnly  declare  I  would 
rather  be  taxed  a  yoke  of  fat  oxen  every  year  than  see  the  nation  dis- 
graced by  this  paltry  gun-boat  system."  Hammond,  in  his  Political 
History  of  New  York,  has  alluded  to  my  Federal  propensities.  Per- 
haps they  may  be  traced  partly  to  this  good  old  man. 

For  the  greatest  part  of  the  next  two  or  three  years,  I  was  employed 
as  youngest  clerk  in  the  store  of  Mr.  Terrell,  of  Salem.  Afterwards, 
for  one  quarter,  I  attended  the  select  school  of  Esquire  Morris,  of 
Litchfield,  South  Farms,  and  completed  my  education  by  spending  a 
year  with  our  clergyman,  the  Rev.  Ira  Hart.  Thus  qualified,  and  be- 
fore I  was  seventeen,  I  taught  a  district  school  in  Woodbridge  three 
months. 

About  this  time,  I  accepted  a  clerkship  in  the  store  of  Reuben  Rice, 
of  New  Haven,  who  had  been  the  head  clerk  of  Tyrrel,  where  I  re- 
mained about  eighteen  months.  At  the  end  of  this  period,  I  and  Jo- 
seph N.  Clark  formed  a  connection  with  Isaac  &  Kneeland  Townsend^ 
merchant  tailors,  and  Gilbert  &  Townsend,  West  India  shippers,  and 


APPENDIX.  451 

went  into  business  on  Long  Wharf.  Clark  managed  the  sailors'  cloth- 
ing department,  while  I  was  the  merchant.  The  other  partners  fur- 
nished the  capital.  The  business  was  extensive,  arduous  and  prosper- 
ous ;  but  after  three  or  four  years,  Mr.  Clark  and  I  declined  to  go  on 
with  it,  on  the  original  footing. 

In  connection  with  Mr.  Clark  and  our  former  patrons,  Gilbert  & 
Townsend,  I  then  undertook  an  adventure  for  the  winter.  I  proceeded 
to  Charleston,  S.  C,  with  Gilbert  &  Townsend's  schooner,  the  Ante- 
lope, chartered  and  loaded  on  joint  account,  with  northern  products. 
We  encountered  a  three  days'  gale,  and  were  wrecked  on  Portsmouth 
Beach,  between  capes  Fear  and  Hatteras.  Having  paid  salvage  to  the 
wreckers  and  observed  all  the  forms  due  to  the  underwriters,  I  purchased 
at  the  sale  of  the  wreck,  and  that  of  three  others  resulting  from  the  same 
gale,  a  large  amount  of  materials,  obtained  a  master  builder,  and  con- 
structed a  brig  and  schooner  suited  to  the  West  India  trade.  The  en- 
terprise consumed  two  years.  The  schooner  made  several  voyages. 
The  brig  was  completed  and  loaded  just  in  season  to  be  overtaken  by 
Mr.  Jefferson's  embargo,  Avhich  changed  her  destination  from  a  West 
India  to  a  Connecticut  voyage.  The  adventure  was  then  closed.  Mr. 
Clark  and  myself  took  the  schooner,  and  Gilbert  &  Townsend  the  brig. 

After  the  embargo  was  repealed,  I  made  a  voyage  to  the  West  Indies, 
as  supercargo  of  the  brig  Julius  Caesaj-.  On  my  return,  I  brought 
home  the  first  intelligence  of  the  capture  by  the  French  of  my  schooner 
(Philander)  under  Bonaparte's  Berlin  and  Milan  decrees,  for  having 
been  bound  to  a  British  port.  She  was  condemned,  sold  and  bought  in 
by  the  captain  ;  and  afterwards  captured,  under  the  British  orders  in 
council,  for  having  been  to  a  French  2jorf.,  and  again  condemned ! 

Jacob  Townsend,  of  the  house  of  Gilbert  &  Townsend,  now  proposed 
to  me  to  unite  with  him  in  the  coasting  trade  of  the  lakes.  I  assented, 
and  with  Shelden  Thompson,  shipmaster,  and  our  ship-carpenters,  pro- 
ceeded to  Oswego  River.  At  the  falls,  we  cut  the  frame  for  a  schooner 
of  one  hundred  and  odd  tons,  on  the  ground  now  occupied  by  the 
thriving  village  of  Fulton.  I  then  visited,  for  the  first  time,  the  hamlet 
of  Oswego,  my  future  home,  which  has  swelled  from  300  to  a  city  of 
1G,000  inhabitants.  Thompson  proceeded  to  Lake  Erie  to  provide  mate- 
rials for  another  vessel  on  the  Niagara  Piver. 

With  our  joint  capital  of  ^14,000,  we  built  two  vessels,  established  a 
store  at  Oswego  and  another  at  Lewiston,  and  in  connexion  with  Gene- 
ral and  Judge  Porter  and  Major  Barton,  (who  held  from  the  State  a 
lease  of  the  Niagara  portage,)  we  conducted  a  major  part  of  the  com- 
merce of  the  lakes  for  the  two  years  preceding  the  war  with  Great  Brit- 
ain.   In  1812,  we  found  we  had  escaped  Bonaparte's  decrees  and  the 


452  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUET. 

British  orders  in  council,  to  be  involved  in  a  vindictive  and  desolating 
war.  Our  business  was  broken  up ;  our  homes  were  invaded,  plundered 
and  burned. 

I  was  appointed  military  and  naval  store  keeper  at  Oswego.  When 
the  port  was  threatened  in  1814,  the  entire  dispo.-.ition  of  the  public 
stores  was  committed  to  my  discretion  ;  and  after  the  capture,  I  received 
the  thanks  of  the  quarter-master's  department  for  the  skill  and  success 
with  which  I  had  discharged  the  trust.  I  was  myself  captured  with  the 
remnant  of  stores  on  hand,  nor  was  the  manner  over-gracious.  Com- 
modore Sir  James  Yeo  asked  me  to  furnish  pilots  to  conduct  his  boats 
out  of  the  harbor  to  the  fleet  when  laden  with  salt  and  military  stores. 
I  stated  that  our  inhabitants  had  left  the  village  and  I  had  no  one  un- 
der my  command.  He  replied  with  an  oath,  "Then  go  yourself,  and 
if  you  get  the  boats  aground,  I'll  shoot  you,"  putting  his  hand  on 
my  shoulder  and  conducting  me  to  a  boat.  Col.  Harvey,  on  the  bank 
above,  called  out  to  Sir  James,  "  that  is  the  public-store  keeper,  and 
may  be  useful  to  us,"  when  he  called  me  back.  Subsequently,  he  said  to 
me,  "  You  are  our  prisoner.  I  shall  expect  you  to  inform  me  what 
public  stores  are  on  hand,  what  have  been  secreted  in  the  neighborhood, 
if  any,  and  what  have  been  deposited  in  the  rear  of  the  port."  I  re- 
plied I  could  not  give  the  information,  my  books  and  papers  having 
been  sent  away  for  safety  ;  n9r  would  it  be  proper,  if  I  could.  He  re- 
joined that  he  had  nothing  to  say  about  my  duty  ;  that  if  I  gave  him 
this  information  correctly,  he  should  allow  me  to  remain;  if  not,  lie 
should  send  me  to  Quebec.  He  gave  me  leave  to  take  my  trunk,  and 
ordered  me  on  board  his  flag-ship,  the  Prince  Regent,  a  fine  frigate.  I 
found  my  wardrobe  and  books  plundered  to  the  lastarticle.  After  secur- 
ing their  plunder,  and  burning  the  barracks,  the  officers  came  on  board, 
about  midnight,  when  Lt.  General  Drummond  enquired  for  the  store 
keeper.  When  pointed  out  to  him,  he  lavished  upon  me  a  profusion  of 
vulgar  epithets,  and  concluded  by  saying,  "  d — n  you,  you  ought  to  be 
strung  up  to  the  yard  arm.  You  said  there  were  no  stores  secreted, 
and  we  found  sunk  in  the  river,  at  your  wharf,  three  or  four  cannon  and 
as  many  ships'  anchors."  Col.  Harvey  was  evidently  mortified  by  the 
rudeness  and  vulgarity  of  his  superiors,  and  in  a  walk  on  the  quarter- 
deck next  day,  apologized  for  them  by  saying  their  loss  was  severe,  and 
among  the  killed  and  wounded  were  some  of  their  best  ofiicers.  Col. 
Harvey  was  a  gentleman  in  manners,  and  a  brilliant  officer. 

In  1815,  I  married  the   youngest  daughter  of  Capt.  Edward  O'Con- 
ner,  a  Revolutionary  soldier. 

After  the  war,  our  busines^s  was  resumed  and  extended  by  a  branch  at 


APPENDIX.  453 

Black  Rock,  conducted  on  the  part  of  Townsend,  Bronson  &  Co.,  by 
Thompson,  and  on  the  part  of  Porter,  Barton  &  Co.,  by  Nathaniel  Sill, 
under  the  firm  of  Sill,  Thompson  &  Co.  Our  connexion  was  closed  in 
1822. 

In  1822  my  neighbors  procured  my  nomination  to  the  State  Senate, 
Avithout  consulting  or  even  confiding  to  me  the  secret.  Being  duly 
elected  under  the  new  constitution,  I  drew  two  years,  during  which 
time  the  principle  service  rendered  my  constituents  was  to  procure  a 
law  authorizing  the  construction  of  the  Oswego  Canal;  a  small  appropri- 
ation for  the  improvement  of  the  Oswego  River  having  been  extorted 
from  the  Legislature  before,  and  this  partly  through  my  agency. 

Identified  early  with  the  Oswego  Canal,  I  became  its  advocate  and  de- 
fender through  a  stormy  conflict  of  twenty-five  years.  During  all  this 
period,  it  had  to  meet  and  counteract  the  hostility  of  Western  New  York, 
headed  by  the  jealous  and  sharp  rival  interest  of  Butialo.  So  much 
was  I  connected  with  this  work  in  public  estimation,  that  when  I  repaired 
to  Albany  with  a  remonstrance  against  the  resolution  of  Mr.  Hickox 
of  Buft'alo,  to  repeal  the  Oswego  Canal  law,  while  little  progress  had  yet 
been  made,  in  its  construction,  meeting  Aaron  Burr  in  the  hall 
of  the  capitol,  he  saluted  me  by  saying,  "  Ah !  you  are  here  to  de- 
fend your  canal,"  and  added,  "  I  am  with  you  ;"  I  said  I  believed  all  sensi- 
ble men  were  with  us ;  to  which  he  replied  characteristically,  "  Ah,  my 
young  friend,  if  that's  all,  you  have  a  vast  majority  against  you."  If 
this  protracted  warfare  did  not  improve  my  temper,  it  sharpened 
my  pen,  as  I  was  charged  with  all  the  memorials,  remonstrances,  and 
newspaper  battles  incident  to  the  conflict  for  these  twenty-five  years,  and 
down  to  the  last  half  dozen  years,  when  I  resigned  in  favor  of  younger 
heads  and  stronger  hands. 

The  other  events  which  signalized  my  two  years'  service  were  a  report 
I  wrote  for  the  chairman  of  the  committee  on  manufactures,  and  my 
connexion  with  the  famous  seventeen  who  defeated  the  Electoral  law. 
Gen.  McClure  of  Steuben  introduced  the  annual  resolutions  call- 
ing on  Congress  to  encourage  and  protect  manufactures.  They  con- 
tained the  usual  fallacies  and  appeals  to  public  prejudice,  alledging  that 
importations  impoverished  the  people,  that  England  monopolized  our 
public  securities,  loaded  us  with  debt,  robbed  us  of  our  specie, 
and  degraded  us  to  a  tributary,  &c.  Mallory,  chairman  of  the  commit- 
tee in  the  Senate,  to  whom  these  resolutions  were  referred,  (which  had 
passed  the  Assembly  almost  by  acclamation,)  entertained  doubts  as  to  the 
soundnesss  of  this  popular  theory,  and  proposed  to  me  to  try  my  hand 
at  a  report,  which,  if  approved,  he  would  off'er  to  his  committee.     I  pre- 


454  niSTOKY  OF  waterburt. 

pared  the  report  with  care.  He  approved  it,  and  one  of  his  committee, 
Wooster  of  Herkimer,  applauded  the  work,  but  said  popular  prejudice 
would  not  tolerate  such  doctrines,  which  were  out  and  out  free  trade. 
His  committee,  therefore,  reported  the  resolutions  from  the  Assembly, 
and  Mallory  offered  his  substitute  and  defended  it  ably,  with  such  aid  as 
I  could  afford  him.  It  received  one  vote,  that  of  Wheeler  of  White 
Hall,  a  merchant,  in  addition  to  those  of  Mallory  and  myself.  Mallory 
frankly  disclaimed  tbe  authorship.  It  was  published  and  applauded  by 
the  city  press.  Indeed,  it  was  well  received  by  some  of  the  senators, 
and  among  them  Gen.  Root,  our  president. 

In  1829,  I  was  returned  to  the  Senate  again;  took  my  seat  in 
1830,  and  was  placed  at  the  head  of  the  finance  committee.  The  sub- 
ject which  occupied  the  largest  share  of  my  time,  was  the  usuiy  ques- 
tion, John  C.  Spencer  introduced  a  bill  to  enforce  the  usury  laws  by 
new  and  additional  penalties.  This  bill  passed  the  Assembly,  and  was 
referred  by  the  Senate  to  my  committee.  It  had  some  able  oppo- 
nents in  the  Senate,  foremost  among  whom  were  Maynard  of  Utica  and 
Tracey  of  Butfalo.  There  were  others  opposed  in  principle  to  the  bill, 
but  unwilling  to  act,  believing  the  measure  popular.  The  policy  adopt- 
ed therefore  was  to  procrastinate,  and  enlist  friends  by  arguments  and 
reports.  I  therefore  had  occasion  to  report  more  or  less  elaborately 
against  the  usury  penalties  during  each  of  these  four  winters. 

In  my  second  winter  the  Senate  by  resolution  instructed  my  com- 
mittee to  report  to  the  next  Legislature  the  history  of  the  usury  laws  and 
tbeir  penalties  as  modified  from  time  to  time.  Aided  by  Senator  May- 
nard and  Cashier  A.  B.  Johnson  of  Utica,  circulars  were  addressed  to 
prominent  men  throughout  the  Union,  which  brought  a  valuable  amount 
of  information,  together  with  the  opinions  of  the  writers.  All  the  parties 
addressed,  with  a  single  exception,  favored  repeal  or  amelioration. 
Among  them  were  John  Quincey  Adams,  Gen.  Cass,  Gov.  Burnett  of 
Ohio,  Saml.  A.  Foot  of  Connecticut,  Professor  McVickar  of  New  York 
and  Saml.  Smith  of  Baltimore.  The  latter,  an  old  merchant  and  Uni- 
ted States  senator,  was  the  exception. 

In  my  third  senatorial  year,  the  important  question  was  agitated 
whether  the  general  fund  should  be  preserved  and  fortified  by  a  small 
tax ;  or  exhausted  and  the  government  be  thrown  upon  the  canal  reve- 
nues for  support  thereafter.  Hammond  says,  (Political  History  of  New 
York,  Vol.  2,  p.  411,)  "Mr.  Bronson,  in  accordance  with  the  views  of 
the  governor  and  comptroller,  on  the  28th  February,  1832,  brought  in 
a  bill  to  levy  a  tax  of  one  mill  on  the  dollar  for  three  years."  He 
adds,  "For  myself,  I  think  the  general  fund  ought  to  have  been  replen- 


I 


APPENDIX.  455 

ished  by  a  temporary  tax,  [&c.]  This  immensely  important  question 
was  elaborately  debated,  and  with  great  ability,  in  the  Senate.  Beards- 
ley,  Maynard,  Seward  and  others  opposed,  and  Bronson  and  Tracey 
supported  the  bill.  On  the  final  vote  a  very  large  majority  were  opposed 
to  the  tax,  five  members  only,  Bronson,  Fisk,  Fuller,  Halsey  and  Tracey 
voting  in  favor." 

Near  the  close  of  my  last  session,  a  bill  came  from  the  Assembly  re- 
ducing the  legal  rate  of  interest  to  6  per  cent,  and  bank  discount  to  5^ 
per  cent,  guarding  these  rates  by  the  existing  usury  penalties.  Against 
this  bill,  were  presented  remonstrances  from  New  York,  Hudson,  Alba- 
ny, and  the  County  cf  St.  Lawrence.  All  were  referred  to  the  finance 
committee,  on  which  I  made  an  elaborate  report,  "  Senate  document 
No.  106,  12th  April,  1833."  This  report  embraced  the  subjects  of 
Capital,  Currenct,  Banking  and  Interest.  It  received,  from  the 
city  press  particularly,  liberal  commendation  ;  but  was  pronounced  by 
some  rather  ambitious.  I  learned  that  Mr.  Gallatin  said  it  was  an  able 
and  well  reasoned  document — an  opinion  that  might  well  gratify  any 
one  of  much  more  pretension  than  the  chairman  of  the  finance  com- 
mittee. 

My  political  and  public  life  closed  with  my  second  term  in  the  Sen- 
ate, when  I  resumed  my  mercantile  pursuits,  giving  some  thought  and 
labor  to  public  measures  connected  with  my  pursuits ;  particularly  to 
tlie  debenture  or  drawback  law  of  Congress,  and  the  Treaty  of  Reci- 
procity with  Great  Britain  and  her  American  Provinces.  The  former 
measure  originated  at  Oswego,  and  simply  provided  for  refunding  duties 
paid  on  importations  at  the  sea-board,  on  proof  of  exportation  over  land 
or  by  canal  to  Canada  and  New  Mexico. 

In  1834,  Gen.  Cass,  Secretary  of  War,  on  the  nomination  of  Silas 
Wright,  appointed  me  one  of  the  visitors  of  the  West  Point  Academy. 
Subsequently  the  State  of  New  York  commissioned  me,  with  two  others, 
to  settle  for  Otsego  an  exciting  court-house  question.  With  these 
slight  interruptions,  my  last  twenty  years  have  been  devoted  assiduously 
to  commerce.  Indeed,  this  pursuit  has  never  been  wholly  intermitted 
since  I  became  a  merchant. 

HENRY  BUTTON,  LL.  D. 
Is  the  son  of  Thomas  and  a  younger  brother  of  Rev.  Matthew  R.  Dutton, 
(see  page  389,)  and  was  born  in  Plymouth,  Feb.  12,  1796.  He  was  grad- 
uated at  Yale  College  in  1818,  and  made  a  tutor  in  1821.  ■  He  has  since 
been  a  representative  and  senator  in  the  State  Legislature,  a  judge  of 
the  County  Court  of  New  Haven,  and  governor  of  the  State.  In  1847, 
he  was  appointed  a  professor  in  the  law  department  of  Yale  College, 


456  HISTOIIY    OF   WATEKBUET. 

which  office  he  still  holds.  The  degree  of  LL.  D.  was  conferred  lipon 
hiin  iu  1854. 

SAMUEL  ALFRED  FOOTE 

Was  the  youngest  child  of  John  and  Mary  Foote.  He  was  born  in 
Watertown,   Dec.   17,   1790,    and  resided  with  his  parents    till    Sept. 

1805,  when  he  went  to  live  with  his  elder  brother,  Ebenezer,  (see  page 
390,)  then  residing  in  Troy.  After  a  little  more  than  a  year  spent  in 
the  law  office  of  his  brother,  the  latter  sent  him  to  the  Grammar 
School  connected  with  Union  College.     He  entered  this  school  in  Dec. 

1806,  and  the  Freshman  Class  of  Union  College  iu  Sept.  1807.  He  left 
college  in  Dec.  1810,  and  graduated  in  July,  1811.  After  leaving  col- 
lege, he  read  law  nearly  a  year  with  James  Thomson,  Esq.  of  Milton, 
Saratoga  Co.,  and  then  entered  the  office  of  his  brother  in  Albany,  to 
which  place  the  latter  had  removed.  He  took  charge  of  the  business 
of  the  office  after  Feb.  1812,  when  his  brother's  partner,  Samuel  North, 
Esq.,  was  disabled  by  sickness.  Mr.  North  died  in  Jan.  1813,  when  a 
partnership  was  entered  into  by  the  brothers.  Samuel  A.  had  then  not 
studied  law  the  required  time.  His  brother  made  for  him  a  special  ap- 
plication to  the  Court ;  and  in  consideration,  in  part,  of  the  time  he 
had  spent  in  the  study  while  a  youth  and  before  entering  college,  the 
rule  was  dispensed  with,  an  examination  permitted,  and  a  license  to 
practice  as  an  attorney  in  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  was  granted 
in  Jan.  1813.  He  was  admitted  counselor  in  Jan.  1816.  While  con- 
nected with  his  brother,  he  attended  to  the  business  of  the  office.  The 
partnership  was  prosperous,  but  of  short  duration,  on  account  of  the  early 
death  of  the  senior  brother.  The  survivor,  however,  continued  the  prac-' 
tice  of  law  in  Albany. 

Mr.  Foote  was  appointed  district  attorney  of  the  City  and  County  of 
Albanj',  under  the  administration  of  Gov.  Clinton,  in  July,  1819,  and 
held  the  office  till  Feb.  1821,  when  he  was  removed  and  Benjamin  F. 
Butler  appointed  iu  his  place.  He  continued  in  Albany  till  May,  1828, 
when  he  removed  to  the  City  of  New  York.— (See  The  Foote 
Genealogy.) 

DAVID  HOADLEY,  (2d,) 

A  son  of  David  Hoadley,  (see  page  396,)\vas  born  in  Waterbury,  Feb. 
13,  1806.  While  still  a  minor,  he  was  a  clerk  in  the  drug  store  of 
Hotchkiss  &  Durand,  and  afterwards,  of  Lewis  Hotchkiss,  in  New  Ha- 
ven. In  April,  1827,  he  commenced  business  on  his  own  account  in 
New  York,  and  was  engaged  exclusively  in  the  wholesale  drug  trade 
till  1848.  At  this  time,  on  account  of  impaired  health,  he  relinquished 
active  business.     He  was  chosen  vice  president  of  the  American  Ex- 


AprENDix.  457 

change  Bank,  and  as  his  health  improved,  consented  to  take  an  active  part 
in  the  management  of  the  business.  While  connected  with  that  prosper- 
ous institution,  he  became  widely  known  for  his  prudence  and  skill. 

Resigning  his  place  in  the  American  Exchange  Bank,  Mr,  Hoadley 
accepted  the  office  of  president  of  the  Panama  Railroad  Company,  and 
entered  upon  his  duties,  Nov.  1,  1853,  He  still  occupies  tbat  responsi- 
ble and  difficult  position.  Few  men  in  the  financial  circles  of  New 
York  have  a  higher  reputation  for  ability,  integrity  and  successful 
enterprise, 

ISRAEL  HOLMES 

Is  a  younger  brother  of  Capt.  Reuben  Holmes,  (see  page  396,)  is  a 
descendant  of  Lieut.  Thomas  Judd,  and  was  born  Dec,  19,  1800.  He 
received  an  ordinary  common  school  education,  and  was  himself  a 
teacher  of  the  school  in  the  West  Centre  district  in  Waterbury  when  he 
was  quite  young.  Afterwards,  he  became  principal  clerk  in  the  store  of 
J.  M,  L.  &  W.  H.  Scovill,  and  while  engaged  in  the  business  of  these 
gentlemen,  was  sent  by  them  to  England,  in  1829,  to  procure  workmen 
for  their  button  factory  and  the  brass  business. 

In  1831,  Holmes  &  Ilotchkiss  built  the  brass  mill  afterwards  occu- 
pied by  Brown  &  Elton.  Mr.  Holmes  was  desirous  of  connecting  wire 
making  with  brass  rolling,  but  could  find  no  person  in  this  country  who 
had  any  knowledge  of  the  business.  Foreseeing  the  importance  of  the 
interests  connected  with  the  successful  introduction  of  this  new  branch 
of  manufacture  into  the  country,  he  made  a  second  voyage  to  England 
in  1831,  and  returned  with  men  and  machinery  enough  to  make  a  be- 
ginning— small,  it  is  true,  but,  viewed  in  its  results  as  we  now  see  them, 
of  great  value  to  Waterbury  and  to  the  country.  In  1834,  Mr,  Holmes 
removed  to  Wolcottville,  and  in  the  same  year  made  a  third  voyage  to 
England,  and  procured  workmen  and  machinery  for  the  manufjicture  of 
brass  kettles  in  Wolcottnlle,  by  the  only  method  then  known.  This 
was  the  origin  of  this  branch  of  business  in  the  United  States.  In 
1845,  Mr.  Holmes  returned  to  Waterbury,  and  as  president  of  the  Wa- 
terbury Brass  Co,  occupied  himself  in  building  and  putting  in  operation 
their  works  in  the  east  part  of  the  town,  and  afterwards  of  their  "  V/est 
Mill,*'  which  is  located  near  the  railroads  in  the  western  part  of  the  city. 

He  also  superintended  the  erection  of  a  brass  mill  in  Bristol,  and  is 
now  actively  engaged  in  business  as  superintendent  of  the  brass  rolling 
mill  of  Holmes,  Booth  &  Haydens,  of  which  corporation  he  is  the  presi- 
dent. He  is  a  man  of  great  energy  and  untiring  industry.  It  is  hoped 
it  will  not  offend  his  well  known  modesty  if  it  be  added,  that  he  has 
much  of  the  natural  genius  and  brilliancy  of  intellect  which  belonged  to 
his  brother  Reuben. 


11.   GENEALOGY. 


ADAMS. 

1.  William  Adams  settled  in  Waterbury,  m.  Susanna,  dau.  of 
Ebenezer  Bronson,  Feb.  14,  1739-40,  and  d.  April  23,  1793.  His 
wife  d.  March  22,  1812,  aged  94.  His  ch.  were:  I.  Samuel,  b.  Aug.  9, 
1Y40;  H.  Prudence,  b.  March  31,  1742,  d.  Oct.  16,  1743  ;  HI.  William, 
b.  July  1,  1744,  d.  Oct.  12,  1747  ;  IV.  Prudence,  b.  April  24,  1746,  d. 
young;  V.  William,  b.  June  1,  1748 ;  VI.  Susanna,  b.  Nov.  4,  1749,  m. 
Roswell  Bronson;  VH.  John,  b.  Feb.  2,  1751 ;  VHI.  James,  b.  Feb.  11, 
1754,  d.  unm.  Feb.  1789  ;  IX.  Luke,  b.  March  8, 1756  ;  X.  Sylvanus,  b. 
June  22,  1759  ;  XL  Rulh,  b.  Dec.  14, 1761,  d.  Nov.  26,  1767  ;  XH.  Asa- 
hel,  b.  July  28,  1764,  m.  Eunice  Prichard. 

2.  Samuel,  son  of  William,  (1,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Edmund  Tompkins, 
March  1,  1764,  and  d.  Dec.  13,  1773.  Ch.  as  follows  :  L  Prudence,  b. 
Aug.  10,  1765;  IL  Pteuben,  b.  April  18,  1767,  d.  Oct.  6,  1838;  IIL 
Ruth,  b.  April  8, 1769,  d.  Oct.  28, 1791  ;  IV.  Samuel,  b.  July  10,  1771 ; 
V.  Mary,  b.  Aug.  18,  1773,  m.  Danl.  Upson,  and  d.  June  29,  1830. 

3.  William,  son  of  William,  (1,)  m.  Sarah  Goodwin  of  Lebanon, 
Conn.,  Feb.  22,  1775,  who  d.  Feb.  18,  1788,  and  he  m.  2d,  Orpha  Cos- 
set, Dec.  29,  1788.  He  d.  Jan.  25,  1829.  Ch. :  I.  Merick,  b.  Aug.  30, 
1776,  d.  1785  ;  IL  Sena,  b.  June  5,  1778,  m.  John  Hull;  IIL  Sarah,  b. 
Jan.  3,  1780,  d.  1784;  IV.  Jesse,  b.  Jan.  4,  1782,  d.  Aug.  27,  1825; 
V.  Merick,  b.  March  2,  1786,  d.  1794  ;  VI.  Roxa,  b.  Oct.  3,  1791 ;  VIL 
Chauncey,  b.Dec.  3,  1796  ;  VIH.  Augustus,  b.  Feb.  28,  1799  ;  IX.  Wil- 
liam Hopkins,  b.  Feb.  12,  1802. 

4.  John,  son  of  William,  (1,)  m.  Sarah,  dan.  of  James  Bronson,  May 
25,  1780.  She  d.  Nov.  21,  1793,  and  he  m.  Cynthia,  dau.  of  Ebenezer 
Fitch  of  Wallingford,  May  21,  1794.  His  ch.  were:  I.  Esther,  b. 
March  21,  1781 ;  II.  Fanny,  b.  March  7,  1783 ;  IIL  Benoni,  b.  Feb.  25, 
1785  :  IV.  Sarah,  b.  Feb.  6,  1787  ;  V.  Hannah,  b.  Dec.  1,  1789;  VI. 


APPENDIX.  459 

Juliana,  b.  June  24, 1793,  d.  1793  ;  VII.  Lutlier,  b.  May  31,  1795  ;  VIII. 
Amanda. 

5.  Luke,  son  of  William,  (1,)  m.  Lucy,  dau.  of  Joseph  Nichols, 
Jan.  3,  1782.  Ch. :  L  Anne,  b.  Aug.  31,  1782  ;  IL  Susanna,  b.  Sept. 
16,  1784;  IIL  Betsey,  b.  Dec.  21,  1786. 

6.  Sylvakus,  son  of  William,  (1,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Dea.  Timothy 
nopldns,  Dec.  4,  1783.  Ch.:  L  Mark,  b.  Sept.  16,  1784;  IL  Chloe, 
b.  Feb.  4,  1786 ;  IIL  Mark,  b.  Oct.  18,  1787  ;  IV.  Timothy  Hopkins,  b. 
Sept.  29,  1789. 

ALCOCKE.* 

ALCOCK,  ALLCOCKS,  ALLCOX,  ALCOX,  ALCOTT. 

1.  Joiix  Alcott  was  b.  at  Beverly,  Yorkshire,  Eng.,  was  Bishop 
of  Rochester,  Worcester  and  Ely,  in  the  time  of  Ilenry  VII ;  also  Lord 
Chancellor  of  Eng.  He  founded  Jesus  College,  Cambridge,  and  was 
distinguished  in  Lis  day  for  his  learning  and  piety.  He  d.  Oct.  1, 
1500,  and  was  buried  in  a  sumptuous  tomb  of  his  own  designing,  in 
Ely  cathedral — now  much  defaced. 

2.  Mr.  George  Alcocke  came  to  this  country  in  1630,  and  settled 
in  Roxbury,  Mass.,  where  he  was  a  deacon  of  the  church,  and  an  impor- 
tant man  in  the  Colony. 

3.  Mr.  Thomas  Alcocke,  the  progenitor  of  all  bearing  the  name  in 
Conn.,  came  from  Eng.  in  Winthrop's  company  in  1630,  with  his 
brother  George.  In  the  covenant  of  the  First  church  of  Boston,  dated 
at  Charlestown,  August  27,  1630,  Thomas  Alcocke  stands  forty-sixth 
on  the  list  of  original  members:  "  Ano,  8:  7:  1639,  our  brother  Thomas 
Alcocke  and  sister  Margary  were  recommended  to  Deddam,"  where  he 
settled.  In  1650,  he  removed  to  Boston,  and  d.  Jtm.  1657.  His  wid. 
Margary,  m,  John  Benham  of  New  Haven,  to  which  place  she  removed 
about  1660.  His  ch.  were  :  I.  Mary,  baj).  Nov.  3,  1635,  and  d.  1644; 
II.  Elizabeth,  bap.  Dec.  10,  1637,  d.  the  same  year ;  IIL  Elizabeth,  b. 
Oct.  4,  1638,  m.  May  6,  1656,  Joseph  Soper  of  Boston;  IV.  Sarah,  b. 
Dec.  28,  1639;  V.  Hannah,  b.  May  25,  1642;  VL  Mary,  b.  June  8, 
1644,  m.  Sept.  27,  1664,  James  Robinson  of  Dorchester,  d.  March  13, 
1718  ;  VII.  Rebecca,  b.  1646,  was  grandmother  of  the  wife  of  the  first 
Gov.  Trumbull  of  Conn.;  VIIL  Phillip,  b.  1648,  settled  in  New  Haven; 
IX.  John,  bap.  Aug.  6,  1651,  m.  Constance,  dau.  of  Humphrey  Milane 
of  Boston,  where  he  resided,  and  d.  before  I7l2.  He  had  two  sons  and 
six  daughters. 

*  For  the  materials  of  this  notice  I  am  indebted  to  Amos  Bronson  Alcott  of  Boston,  Mass. 


460  mSTOKY    OF   WATEEBUKT. 

4.  Phillip,  son  of  Thomas,  (.3,)  went  to  New  Haven  with  his  motli- 
er,  who  had  married  John  Benliam,  in  whose  family  he  was  brought 
up.  He  m.  in  Dec.  5,  1672,  Elizabeth,  only  dau.  of  Thomas  Mitchell, 
one  of  the  early  planters  of  New  Haven.  He  possessed  a  large  estate. 
He  m.  at  Wethersfield,  his  second  wife,  (in  1699,  April  4,)  Sarah,  wid. 
of  Nathaniel  Butler,  and  afterwards  lived  there.  He,  Phillip,  d.in  1Y15, 
aged  58.     His  ch.  were,  I.  John,  b.  July  14, 1675  ;  H.  Thomas,  b.  1677  ; 

HI.  Elizabeth,  b.  Feb.  6,  1679,  and  m, Gray  ;  IV.  Phillip,  b.  Nov. 

19,  1681,  d.  before  1712  ;  V.  Agnes,  b.  1683,  m. Harrison. 

5.  John,  son  of  Phillip,  (4,)  lived  in  New  Haven,  ra.  Susanna , 

who  d.in  1737.  He  d.  March  1722-23,  aged  47.  Ch  :  I.  Abigail,  ni. 
Caleb  Thomas  of  New  Haven,  Jan.  6, 1736  ;  H.  John,  b.  Jan.  14,  1705, 
settled  in  Waterbury ;  HI.  Elizabeth,  b.  July  31, 1708,  m.  July  21, 1737, 
Samuel  Hummerston  of  New  Haven;  IV.  Sarah,  b.  Aug.  12,  1711,  m. 
June  23,  1746,  John  Ailing  of  New  Haven  ;  V.  Stephen,  b.  Aug.  10, 
1714,  m.  Jan.  16,  1737,  Abigail  Hummerston,  and  lived  at  Amity,  now 
Woodbridge  ;  was  a  large  land  owner,  and  had  two  ch.,  Stephen,  b.  Aug. 
22,  1738,  and  Sarah,  who  m.  Solomon  Gilbert  of  New  Haven  ;  VI. 
Mary,  b.  Aug.  10,  I7l7,  m.  Nov.  11,  1736,  Daniel  Lines,  of  New  Ha- 
ven. 

6.  Thomas,  son  of  Phillip,  (4,)  m.  1st,  Mary  Gedney,  April,  1706,  and 
2d,  Abigail  Austin  of  East  Haven,  at  which  place  he  resided,  and  where 
he  d.  April  2,  1757,  aged  80.     He  had  two  sons  and  two  daughters. 

7.  John,  son  of  John,  (5,)  was  ra.  by  Rev.  Isaac  Stiles  of  North 
Haven,  Jan.  14,  1729-30,  to  Deborah,  dau.  of  Isaac  Blalceslee  of  the 
same  place.  He  d.  Jan.  6,  1777.  His  wife  d.  Jan.  7,  1789,  aged  77. 
They  had  12  ch.,  eleven  of  whom  were  b.  in  Waterbury.  They  were  as 
follows  :  I.  Lydia,  b.  Nov.  24,  1730,  m.  Isaac  Blakeslee  of  North 
Haven,  Nov.  23,  1757,  where  she  settled,  and  d.  Nov.  15,  1796,  aged 
66.  She  had  8  ch.  II.  John,  b.  Dec.  28,  1731  ;  III.  James,  b.  June 
],  1734  ;  IV.  Jesse,  b.  March  23,  1736  ;  V.  Daniel,  b.  March  25,  1738 ; 
VI.  David,  b.  Jan.  12,  1740;  VII.  Deborah,  b.  1741,  m.  1st,  Isaac 
Twitchell,  2d,  Wait  Hotchkiss,  and  settled  near  the  "  mill  place,"  on 
Mad  River;  VIII.  Mary,  b.  1744,  m.  Obed  Bradley  of  North  Haven, 
where  she  lived  and  d.  March  6,  1825;  IX.  Thankful,  b.  1748,  m. 
Thaddeus  Baldwin  of  Plymouth,  where  she  settled,  and  d.  March  1,  1839  ; 

X.  Hannah,  b.    1751,  m.  Joel  Norton  of  Bristol,  and  d.  March  1,  1821  ; 

XI.  Anna,  m.  Abel  Curtiss  of  Wolcott,  and  d.  Feb.  5,  1822  ;  XII. 
Stephen,  d.  young. 

8.  John,  son  of  John,  (7,)  m.  Aug.  28,  1755,  Mary,  dau.  of  Solo- 
mon Chatfield  of  Derby,  and  settled  near  his  father.     He  was  a  leading 


APPENDIX.  4G1 

man  in  the  society  of  Farmingbury.  Botli  he  and  his  wife  were  mem- 
bers of  the  church  there,  which  was  organized  by  Rev.  Mr.  Gillett,  Nov. 
3  8,  1773.  Mrs.  Alcox  d.  Feb.  28,  1807,  a.  71,  and  Mr.  Alcox  d.  Sept. 
27,  1808.  Their  ch.  were  :  I.  Lydia,  b.  Dec.  8,  1756,  m.  1st,  Charles 
Frisbie,  2d,  Nathaniel  Lewis,  both  of  Wolcott,  and  d.  Sept.  23,  1830. 
II.  Solomon,  b.  May  8,  1759;  III.  Samuel,  b.  Nov.  29,  17GI;  IV. 
John  Blakeslee,  b.  June  24,  1764;  V.  Mary,  b.  Sept.  8,  1766,  d.  Feb. 
18,  1770;  VI.  Isaac,  b.  April  12,  1769,  m.  Isabel  Lane  of  Wolcott. 
He  lived  near  the  east  church,  Plymouth,  where  he  d.  1809.  He  had 
an  only  child,  which  d.  in  infancy;  VIT.  Joseph  Chatfield,  b.  May  7, 
1771  ;  VIIL  Mark,  b.  May  11,  1773  ;  IX.  Thomas,  b.  Oct.  16, 1775,  d. 
April  27,  1778.  Of  the  preceding,  Solomon,  Samuel  and  John  B. 
served  in  the  Revolutionary  war. 

9.  James,  son  of  John,  (7,)  m.  Hannah  Barnes,  and  settled  near  the 
homestead  of  his  father.  He  d.  Aug.  9,  1806,  aged  72.  Ch. :  I.  Obe- 
dience, m.  John  Kenea,  who  d.  aged  88  ;  II.  Rosanna,  m.  John  Fris- 
bie, and  d.  in  1830  :  IIL  Meliscent,  m.  Nathaniel  Lane  ;  IV.  James,  m. 
Esther  Castle  ;  V.  Mehitable,  m.  James  Bradley ;  VL  Lois,  m.  John 
Smith  ;  VII.  Deadima,  m.  Joshua  Minor,  and  d.  Jan.  15,  1852,  aged 
69  ;  VIIL  Hannah,  m.  Osman  Norton  ;  IX.  Olive,  m.  Edward  Good- 
year; X.  Rhoda,  m.  Lewis  Sanford. 

10.  Jesse,  son  of  John,  (7,)  m.  Patience  Blakeslee,  and  settled  in 
Wolcott.  He  d.  Oct.  29,  1829,  aged  74.  His  Avid.  m.  Zacharinh 
Hitchcock,  and  d.  in  1840,  aged  97.  Ch. :  I.  Sarah,  m.  David  Churchill ; 
IL  Lyman,  d.  Nov.  17,  1781,  aged  16  ;  HI.  Susan,  ra.  John  Beecher, 
and  d.  Nov.  3,  1836,  aged  69;  IV.  Jesse,  m.  Lucy  Minor;  V.  Joel,  m. 
Elizabeth  Johnson,  and  d.  May  27,  1810,  aged  32;  VI.  Hannah,  m. 
Daniel  Byington  ;  VII.  Chloe,  m.  Solomon  Shelley ;  VIIL  Ithamer,  d. 
Aug.  9,  1798,  aged  3. 

11.  Daniel,  son  of  John,  (7,)  m.  Elizabeth  Dutton,  moved  to  Cole- 
brook,  Conn,  and  d.  May  24,  1805.     He  had  nine  children. 

12.  David,  son  of  John,  (7,)  m,  Abigail  Johnson,  who  d.  Feb.  23, 
1793,  aged  55,  and  he  m.  Feb.  5,  1795,  Sarah  Pratt.  He  lived  on  the 
homestead,  where  he  d.  Jan.  29,  1821.  Ch. :  L  Amy,  b.  Sept.  16, 
1768,  d.  May  5,  1830,  aged  62  ;  IL  Abigail,  b.  Dec.  14, 1770,  m.  Asa- 
hel  Lane;  HI.  Daniel,  b.  April  16,  1774,  m.  Feb.  22,  1805,  Anna 
Fenn;  IV.  Obed,  b.  Sept.  8,  1775,  m.  July  13,  1797,  Anna  Andrews  of 
Watertown  ;  V.  and  VI.  Eldad  and  Medad,  b.  Sept.  14,  1779.  Eldad 
m.  Jan.  29,  1817,  Sybil  Bartholomew,  and  d.  June  4,  1850.  Medad 
m.  Sylvia,  dau.  of  Capt.  Amos  Bronson  of  Plymouth.  She  d.  at  Medi- 
na, Ohio,  Sept.   18,  1855,  aged  89  ;  VII.  Eunice,  b.  Oct.   17,  1782,  m. 


463 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURT. 


April  24,  1806,  Archibald  Mosher ;  VIII.  Deborah,  b.  Nov.  25,  1784, 
m.  Feb.  18, 1808,  Isaac.  Minor,  Mho  d.  March  22,  1813.  She  m.  Lorrin 
Fancher,  March  4,  1820. 

13.  Solomon,  son  of  John,  (8,)  m.  1st,  Pamela  Roberts,  who  d.  in 
1810,  aged  49,  and  he  m.  2d,  Abigail  Goodyear.  He  lived  at  Potucko's 
Ring,  near  his  father's,  and  d.  May  21,  1818.  Ch. :  I.  Lydia,  m.  and  d- 
in  Ohio;  II.  Hannah,  m.  1st,  Richard  Wethington  of  Waterbury,  and 
2d,  Capt.  Gates  Upson  of  Wolcott;  III.  Seth,  went  to  Ohio;  IV.  Solo- 
mon, d.  in  childhood ;  V.  Leonard,  d.  near  Cleveland,  Ohio,  where  Seth 
now  resides. 

14.  Samuel,  son  of  John,  (8,)  m.  Lydia  Warner  of  Waterbury,  set- 
tled iu  Wolcott,  and  d.  June  9,  1810.  Lydia,  his  wife,  d.  May  2,  1848, 
aged  82.  Their  ch.  were  :  I.  James,  m.  Sarah  W.  Warner  of  Water- 
bury, and  resides  in  Monrovia,  N.  Y. ;  11.  Mary,  m.  Isaac  Hotchkiss  of 
Wolcott,  and  d.  Dec.  1840 ;  III.  Cleora,  d.  Feb.  16,  1826,  aged  33  ;  IV. 
Statira,  m.  Oct.  4,  1819,  Amos  Shepherd  of  Southington  ;  V.  Candace, 
m.  Geo.  Griswold,  and  lives  in  Iowa. 

15.  John  Blakeslee,  son  of  John,  (8,)  ra.  Lois  Gaylord  of  Wolcott, 
and  settled  at  Spindle  Hill.  He  d.  Sept.  17,  1837.  His  wid.  d.  April 
7,  1839,  aged  70.  Ch. :  L  Riley,  m.  1st,  Ruth  Frisbie,  2d,  Olive  War- 
ner, and  resides  in  Waterbury ;  II.  Alraon,  m.  twice  and  lives  in  Wol- 
cott; III.  Jedediah  G.,  m.  1st,  Sophia  Roper  of  Wolcott,  2d,  Lois  Gay- 
lord  of  Harpersfield,  N.  Y.  He  lives  on  Spindle  Hill,  where  his  father 
died. 

16.  Joseph  Chatfield,  son  of  John,  (8,)  m.  Oct.  13,  1790,  Anna, 
dau.  of  Capt.  Amos  Bronson  of  Plymouth.  Joseph  C.  first  lived 
near  his  brother  Solomon  at  "Potucko's  Ring,"*  but  in  1805,  settled 
near  his  brother  John  B.,  at  Clinton  Hill  or  New  Connecticut.  He  d. 
April  3, 1829.  His  wid.  Anna  still  lives.  They  had  the  following  ch. :  I. 
Betsey,  b.  April  4, 1798,  d.  Nov.  5, 1798  ;  IL  Amos  Bronson,  (see  p,  447,) 
b.  Nov.  29,  1799 ;  HI.  Chatfield,  b.  Oct.  23, 1801,  ra.  1st,  Nancy  Comstock 
of  Paris,  N.  Y.,  and  2d,  Miranda  Baily.  He  lives  at  Oriskany  Falls,  N. 
Y. ;  IV.  and  V.  Pamela  and  Pamila,  b.  Feb.  4,  1805.  Pamela  m.  James 
Baily  of  Wolcott,  moved  to  Pennsylvania,  and  d.  Feb.  11,  1849.  Pa- 
mila m.  Ransom  Gaylord  of  Bristol,  went  to  Stockbridge,  N.  Y.,  and  d. 
June  14,  1833 ;  VL  Betsey,  b.  Feb.  14,  1808,  m.  Linus  Pardee  of  Wol- 
cott, and  lives  at  West  Edmeston  near  Oriskany  Falls,  N.  Y. ;  VII. 
Phebe,  b.  Feb.  18,  1810,  m.  William  Norton  of  Wolcott,  lived  on 
the  family  homestead,  where  she  died  July  28,  1844,  aged  34  ;  VIII. 

*  So  called  from  Potucko,  an  Indian,  who  having  fired  a  ring  of  brushwood  to  surround  and 
catch  deer  and  other  game,  was  himself  entrapped  and  consumed.    So  says  tradition. 


APPENDIX.  463 

George,  b.  March  20,  1812,  d.  July  10,  1812  ;  IX.  Junius,  b.  July  6, 
1818,  m.  Nancy  Jane  PritcLard  of  Litchfield,  Coun.,  lived  at  Oriskany 
Falls,  and  d.  April  16,  1852,  aged  34  ;  X.  Ambrose,  b.  Sept.  10, 1820, 
m.  Anna  Upson  of  Wolcott,  and  lives  at  Plantsville  in  Southington. 

17.  Mark,  son  of  John,  (8,)  m.  Mary  Lane  of  Wolcott,  who  d.  Oct. 
8,  1834,  aged  61.  He  d.  Nov.  21,  1846.  Their  eh.  were:  L  and  IL 
Alma  and  Manda,  (twins,)  d.  in  infancy  ;  IIL  Thomas;  IV.  Emily,  m. 
Amos  Newton ;  V.  Alvin,  m.  Chloe  Finch  of  Wolcott,  and  lives  near 
the  mill  place,  on  Mad  Kiver,  in  Wolcott ;  VI.  Salina,  m.  James,  son  of 
James  Alcox,  and  lives  in  Wolcott ;  VII.  Isaac,  m.  and  lives  at  Plain- 
ville.  Conn, 

18.  Obed,  son  of  David,  (12,)  m.  Anna,  dau.  of  William  Andrus,  a 
soldier  of  the  Revolution  and  descendant  of  Abraham  Andrus,  one  of 
the  original  settlers  of  Waterbury.  He,  Obed,  d.  Aug.  9,  1847.  His 
eh.  were:  T.  William  A.,  (see  p.  447,)  b.  Aug.  6,  1798,  m.  Phebe  L. 
Bronson  of  Wolcott,  Jan.  14,  1838;  IL  Lovina,  b.  Jan.  17,  1801,  m. 
William  Knowles  of  Haddam,  in  1820,  d.  March  1,  1821  ;  IIL  Florence, 
b.  Aug.  9,  1804;  IV.  George,  b.  March  25,  1807,  m.  Harriet  Nichols 
and  has  five  children. 

BENEDICT. 

1.  William  Benedict  lived  in  Nottinghamshire,  about  A.  D.  1500, 
and  had  an  only  son,  William,  who  resided  in  the  same  shire.* 

2.  William,  the  son  of  William,  (1,)  had  a  son  William,  b.  in  Not- 
tinghamshire. 

3.  William,  son  of  William,  (2,)  had  by  his  first  wife,  Thomas,  b.  in 
England,  in  1617.     His  2d  wife  was  a  Mrs.  Bridgum. 

4.  Thomas,  son  of  William,  (3,)  m.  Mary  Bridgum,  dau.  of  his 
father's  second  wife,  and  was  a  weaver  by  trade.  He  came  to  Mass., 
where  he  resided  for  a  time.  Thence  he  removed  to  Southold,  L.  L, 
thence  to  Huntington  and  thence  to  Jamaica,  on  the  same  island.  On 
the  26th  of  Sept.  1664,  he  applied,  with  others,  for  liberty  to.settle  at 
the  place  which  is  now  Elizabetbtown,  N.  J.,  and  the  petition  was 
granted.  Gov.  Nichols  issued  an  order  for  an  election,  dated  Feb.  8, 
1664,  at  James  Fort,  N.  Y.,  to  the  magistrates  of  the  towns  on 
L.  L,  to  elect  two  delegates  in  each  town,  sober,  able  and  discreet 
persons,  to  meet  at  Hemstead  on  the  last  of  February,  to  enact  laws> 
&c.,  and  Thomas  Benedict  was  chosen  one  of  the  delegates  by  the  town 
of  Jamaica.     He  held  a  lieutenant's  commission  from  Gov.  Nichols, 

*  The  early  generations  of  this  family  are  taken  from  a  parchment  record,  now  in  possession 
of  the  family,  whicli  has  the  appearance  of  being  an  ancient  document. 


46i  HISTOKT   OF   WA.TERBURT. 

dated  April  Y,  1665.  During  the  same  year,  he  removed  to  Norwalk, 
Conn.,  with  his  family.  In  1666,  he  was  chosen  town  clerk  and  select- 
man of  Norwalk.  The  office  of  town  clerk  he  held  many  years  at  20s. 
per  year,  and  was  deputy  to  the  General  Court  in  May,  1670  and  1675. 
The  office  of  deacon  he  held  many  years  in  the  church  of  Norwalk,  and 
"  used  the  office  to  the  satisfaction  of  the  church,  until  his  death,"  which 
occurred    in  his  73d   year.     Ch. :  I.  Thomas;  II.  John;  III.  Samuel; 

IV.  James;  V.  Daniel;  VI.  Betty,  m.  John  Slanson,  of  Stamford; 
VII.  Mary,  m.  Lieut.  Ohnsted  of  Norwalk,  Nov.  11,  1670  ;  VIII. 
Sarah,  m.  Dec.  19,  1679,  James  Beebe,  who  was  one  of  the  early  set- 
tlers of  Danbury  ;  IX.  Rebecca,  m.  Doct.  Samuel  Woods,  who  was 
born  and  educated  in  England,  and  settled  in  Danbury. 

5.  Thomas,  son  of  Tho.  (4,)  m.  Mary  Messenger  of  Jamaica,  L.  I., 
and  settled  in  Norwalk.  Ch. :  Mary  b.  1666  ;  Thomas,  b.  1670  ;  Han- 
nah, b.  1676  ;  Esther  b.  1679  ;  Abigail,  b.  1682,  and  Elizabeth. 

6.  Dea.  John,  son  of  Tho.  (4,)  m,  Phebe,  dau.  of  John  Gregory,  of 
Ncrwalk,  Nov.  11,  1670,  and  d.  at  the  age  of  89.  His  wife  d.  1749. 
Ch  :  I.  Sarah  ;  II.  Phebe,  b.  1673  ;  III.  John,  b.  1676  ;  IV.  Jonathan  ; 

V.  Benjamin,  settled  at  Ridgefield,  about  1720,  was  deacon  and  select- 
man ;  VI.  Joseph,  settled  at  Ridgefield;  VII.  James,  b.  1685,  settled 
at  Ridgefield ;  VIII.  Mary  ;  IX.  Thomas. 

7.  Samuel,  son  of  Tho.  (4,)  m.  Rebecca  Andrews,  of  Fairfield.  He 
purchased,  with  his  brother  James,  and  others,  in  1685,  lands  in  Dan- 
bury and  began  a  settlement  there.  Ch. :  Joanna,  b.  Oct.  22,  1673  ; 
Samuel,  b.  March,  1675;  Thomas,  b.  March  27,  1679;  Rebecca,  Esther, 
Nathaniel  and  Abraham  (?) 

8.  James,  son  of  Tho.  (4,)  m.  Sarah  Gregory,  of  Norwalk,  May  10, 
1676,  and  settled  at  Danbury.  Ch. :  Sarah,  b.  June  16,  1677;  Rebecca, 
Phebe,  James,  John,  Thomas  and  Elizabeth. 

9.  Daniel,  son  of  Tho.  (4,)  m.  Mary  Marvin  of  Norwalk,  settled  at 
Danbury.     Ch. :  Mary,  Daniel,  Mercy  and  Hannah. 

10.  Thomas,  son  of  Tlio.  (5,)  m.  Rachel,  dau.  of  Mr.  Samuel  Smith 
of  Norwalk.  Ch. :  I.  Mary,  m.  Daniel  St.  John,  of  Norwalk;  11. 
Thomas,  m.  Deborah,  dau.  of  Jonathan  Waters,  Esq.,  of  Jamaica ; 
III.  Samuel ;  IV.  Daniel;  V.  Rachel,  m.  Eliasaph,  son  of  Danl.  Kellogg 
of  Norwalk ;  VI.  Nehemiah  ;  VII.  Sarah,  m.  Daniel  Hayt,  of  Norwalk. 

11.  John,  son  of  Dea.  John,  (6,)  had  John,  Matthew,  Caleb,  Nathan- 
iel, Annah  and  Phebe. 

12.  Joseph,  son  of  Dea.  John,  (6,)  had  Joseph,  Gideon,  Annn,  Pit- 
man, Jonathan,  Mary,  Ezra  and  John. 

13.  Bknjamin,  son  of  Dea.  John,  (6,)  ha'i  Benjamin,  Timotliy,  John. 
Samuel,  Daniel,  Amos,  Elizabeth,  Mary,  Rachel  and  Thankful. 


HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY.  465 

14.  James,  soi*  of  Dea.  Johu,  (6,)  had  Sarah,  Ruth,  Peter,  Hannah, 
Phebe,  James,  Martha,  John  and  Thomas. 

15.  Thomas,  son  of  Dea.  John,  (6,)  had  Ebenezer,  David,  John,  Thom- 
as, Betty  and  Setli. 

16.  Samuel,  son  of  Thomas,  (10,)  ra.  Jemima,  dau.  of  John  Kesler, 
of  Norwalk.  Ch. :  Jemima,  Samuel,  Mary,  Daniel,  Stephen,  Sarah,  Abi- 
gail, Esther  and  Rachel. 

17.  Daniel,  son  of  Samuel,  (16,)  m.  Sarah  llickox.  He  lived  in 
Daiibury.  Ch. :  Samuel,  Daniel,  Amos,  Noah,  b.  1*737,  Aaron,  b.  Jan. 
17,  174  5,  Ruth,  Sarah  and  Mary. 

18.  Rev.  Xoah,  son  of  Daniel,  (17,)  graduated  at  Nassau  Hall,  in 
1757,  was  ordained  pastor  of  the  First  Congregational  Church  in  Wood- 
bury, Oct.  22,  1760,  and  died  in  1813.  Ch. :  I.  Ruth,  m.  Hon.  Nathan- 
iel Smith ;  H.  Hon.  Noah  B.,  b.  April  2,  1771,  was  an  eminent  lawyer  ; 
HI.  Gen.  Thomas. 

19.  Aarox,  son  of  Daniel,  (17,)  m.  E-ither  Trowbridge,*  of  Danbury 
Dec.  13, 1769 ;  removed  to  Waterbury  the  same  year,  and  settled  in  the 
east  part  of  what  is  now  the  town  of  Middlebury  ;  became  a  leading  man 
in  the  town  ;  was  active  in  the  Revolutionary  war ;  represented  the  town  in 
the  Legislature,  and  was  a  member  of  the  Constitutional  Convention. 
He  d.  Dec.  16, 1841,  aged  97.  His  wife  d.  March  16,  1833.  Ch.  :  I.  Re- 
becca, b.  Aug.  31,  1772,  m.  Eli  Clark  of  Waterbury,  and  had  Joseph, 
Polly,  Maria,  Harriet,  Edward,  Eli  B.,  Timothy,  James  ;  H.  Daniel,  b.  Jan. 
17,  1774,  d.  Nov.  5,  1781;  HI.  Polly,  b.  April  24.  1777,  m.  Asa  Ly- 
man, and  had  Elizabeth,  Mary  Ann,  Caroline,  Louisa,  Theodore  and 
Dwight;  IV.  Amos,  (see  p.  370,)  b.  July  6,  1780,  m.  Ann  Stone,  of 
Litchfield.  Ch. :  Harriet  Ann,  Amelia  C.  and  George  Amos  ;  V.  Sally, 
b.  Aug.  22,1782,  is  unmarried,  and  lives  on  the  old  homestead,  in 
Middlebury;  VL  Aaron,  b.  Aug.  9,  1785;  VH.  A  son,  b.  March  16, 
1788,  died  April  25,  1788;  VIL  Esther,  b.Aug.  11,  1789,  m.  Dr. Jacob 
Linsley,  of  Middlebury  ;  is  a  widow  and  lives  in  Waterbury. 

20.  AAR0x,f  son  of  Aaron,  (19,)  m.  Charlotte  Porter,  of  Waterbury 
Sept.  1808.  Ch. :  I.  Charlotte  Ann,  b.  March  27, 1810,  m.  Scovill  M.  Buck- 
ingham, May  18, 1835  ;  IL  Frances  Jennette,  b.  Nov.  22, 1812,  d.  Feb. 
13,  1830;  HL  George  W.,  b.  Nov.  26,  1814,  m.  Caroline  R.,  dau.  of 
Austin  Steele,  of  Waterbury,  Feb.  8,  1838.  Ch.:  Mary  Caroline,  Fran- 
ces Jennette,  George  Henry,  Aaron  Austin,  and  Clara  Louisa;  IV. 
Charles,  b.  Sept.  23,  1817,  m.  Cornelia  M.  Johnson,  of  Waterbury,  Oct. 

*  She  was  a  descendant  of  William  Trowbridge,  of  New  Haven,  who  was  a  son   of  Thomas 
Trowbridge,  the  progenitor  of  all  of  the  name  in  this  country. 
tSee  p.«S. 

30 


466  HISTOEY   OF   WATEEBLTtY. 

1,  1845.  Ch. :  Amelia  Caroline,  Charlotte  Buckingham,  and  Cornelia 
Johnson;  V.  Mary  Lyman,  Sept.  24,  1819,  m.  John  S.  Mitchell,  of 
New  Haven,  Jan.  3,  1838,  and  had  Charles  B.,b.  1840,  d.  1854. 

BLAKESLEE.* 

1.  Thomas  Blakesley  first  appeared  at  Hartford  about  1  641.  He 
took  the  oath  of  fidelity  at  New  Haven  in  1644,  but  was  at  Bran- 
ford  in  1645,  where  he  lived  some  years.  He  removed  thence  to 
Guilford,  and  died  at  Boston  in  1674,  leaving  a  wife,  Susanna,  and  ch, 
as  follows :  Aaron,  Moses,  Miriam,  wife  of  Samuel  Pond,  and  Abigail, 
wife  of Ball. 

2.  Samuel,!  probably  a  brother  of  Thomas,  (1,)  and  ancestor  of  the 
Blakeslees  who  settled  early  at  Woodbury,  Waterbury,  &c.,  was  a 
planter  at  Guilford  in  1650,  and  m.  Dec,  3,  the  same  year,  Hannah, 
dau.  of  William  Potter  of  New  Haven,  to  which  place  he  removed,  and 
d.  in  1672,  leaving  four  ch.,  viz  :  John,  Mary,  Samuel  and  Ebenezer. 
The  births  of  his  ch.,  as  found  on  record,  were :  I.  John,  b.  Oct.  22, 
1651  ;  n,  a  son  who  d.  1672  ;  HI.  Hannah,  b.  Oct.  22,  1657,  d,  1669 ; 
IV.  Mary,  Nov.  2,  1659  ;  V.  Samuel,  April  8,  1662  ;  VI.  Ebenezer, 
b.  July  17,  1664;  VII.  Hannah,  May  22,  1666;  VIII.  Jonathan, 
March  3,  1669,  d.  1669. 

3.  John,  son  of  Samuel,  (2,)  lived  at  New  Haven,  and  d.  in  1713. 
He  had  by  his  wife,  Grace:  I.  John,  b,  July  15,  1676,  d.  1723,  leaving 
a  family  ;  II.  Hannah  or  Anna,  b.  Aug.  6,  1681,  m.  Moses  Sperry,  Jan. 

1,  1705  ;  III.  Moses,  settled  in  Waterbury. 

4.  Samuel,  son  of  Samuel,  (2,)  settled  at  West  Haven,  m.  Nov.  20, 
1684,  Sarah  Kimberly,  and  removed  to  Woodbury.  The  first  six  of 
his  ch.  were  bap.  at  Woodbury,  Aug.  1697.  The  births  of  his  ch.  re- 
corded at  New  Haven  are  as  follows  :  I.  Samuel,  b.  Jan,  28, 1685,  settled 
in  Woodbury,  (Roxbury  soc, ;)  11.  Miriam,  b.  May  2,  1688  ;  III.  Jona- 
than, b.  Jan.  6,  1690-91;  IV.  Sarah,  b.  Sept.  1692  ;  V,  Anna,  b.  Dec. 

2,  1694  ;  VI.  Mary,  b.  Sept.  6,  1696  ;  VII.  James,  b.  April  27,  1699, 
settled  in  Waterbury;  VIII.  Mehitable,  b.  Aug.  31,  1702;  IX.  Tilly, 
b.  March  18, 1705,  settled  in  Woodbury,  (Roxbury  soc.)  He  m.  Mary 
Brown  of  New  Haven,  Feb.  7,  1728-9. 

*  This  name,  on  the  early  records,  is  written  in  twentj--five  or  more  different  ways.  It  is  now 
generally  spelled  as  above. 

t  There  is  a  tradition  among  his  descendants,  that  two  brothers  of  the  name  of  Blakeslee 
came  from  the  west  of  England,  designing  to  settle  in  the  Plymouth  Colony,  and  that  one  of 
them  died  on  the  passage.  The  other  came  to  Plymouth,  where  he  died  in  the  early  days  of  the 
Colony,  leaving  one  son,  who  was  placed  with  a  blacksmith  in  New  Haven,  Conn.,  to  learn  the 
trade.  It  is  also  asserted  thnt  the  brothers  brought  an  anvil  with  them,  and  that  it  was  seen 
but  a  few  years  since  in  Roxbury,  Conn. 


APPENDIX.  467 

5.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Samuel,  (2,)  d.  Sept.  24,  1725.  His  ch.  were  : 
I.  Ebenezer  and  II.  Hannah,  (twins,)  b.  Feb.  4,  1685  ;  III.  Susannah,  b. 
May  21,  1689;  IV.  Grace,  b.  Jan.  1,  1693-4,  m.  Ebenezer  Ilumber- 
ston,  Oct.  13,  1718;  V.  Abraham,  b.  Dec.  15,  1695  ;  VI.  Isaac,  b.  July 
21,  1V03. 

6.  Deacon  Moses,  son  of  John,  (3,)  m.  Sarah  Benton  of  Hartford, 
Jan.  1,  1702.  He  removed  to  Waterbury  about  1739,  and  settled  on 
land  previously  (about  1722)  laid  out  to  him,  on  what  is  now  called 
Town  Hill,  in  the  east  part  of  the  present  town  of  Plymouth.  His 
house  stood  near  the  residence  of  the  late  Oliver  Stoughton.  He  was 
appointed  deacon  of  the  church  at  the  time  of  its  organization  in  1 740, 
in  which  he  was  an  active  and  influential  member,  as  he  also  was  in  the 
society  and  town.  His  ch.  as  recorded  at  New  Haven  were  :  I.  Moses, 
b.  Sept.  2,  1702,  d.  1728;  II.  Aaron,  b.  April  25,  1704,  d.  young; 
III.  Abner,  b.  Jan.  25,  1705,  d.  1726  ;  IV.  Sarah,  b.  March  3],  1708 ; 
V.  Jesse,  b.  March  30, 1710,  had  a  family  in  New  Haven  ;  VI.  Dinah,  b. 
Jan.  21,  17]  1-12  ;  VII.  Job,  b.  Dec.  8,  1713  ;  VIII.  Job,  Dec.  18, 1714; 

IX.  Aaron,  Feb.  18,  1716-17,  remained  at  New  Haven,  had  a  family; 

X.  Hannah,  b.  March  25,  1718-19  ;  XLThebe,b.  March  12, 1721-2,  m. 
Henry  Cook,  Aug.  30, 1 744  ;  XII.  John,  b  .Dec.  1 5, 1 723,  settled  in  Water- 
bury,  Northbury  soc;  XIII.  Marah,  b.  Jan.  29,  1726-27,  m.  Benjamin 
Upson,  May  30,  1743;  XIV.  Moses,  b.  Jan.  25,  1728-29,  settled  in 
Waterbury. 

7.  James,  son  of  Samuel,  (4,)  settled  in  Waterbury,  m.  Thankful, 
dau.  of  Sergt.  Stephen  Upson  of  Waterbury,  Sept.  15,  1724,  and  d. 
Jan.  12,  1784.     His  ch.  were:  I.  Reuben,  b.  Jan.  18,  1726,  m.  Rhoda 

,  and  d.  Jan.  4,  1813.     Ch. :  Reuben,  b.  1763  ;  Mehitable,  b.  1765  ; 

Louis  Anna,  b.  1768;  Rhoda,  b.  1771  ;  Samuel,  b.  1773;  James,  b. 
1775,  and  Griswold,  b.  1777.  H.  Tilly,  b.  June  10,  172  8,  and  had  Ar- 
chibald, b.  1752,  and  Thankful,  b.  1755,  III.  Mehitable,  b.  Aug.  12, 
1732.    IV.  James,  b.  Feb.  5, 1735. 

8.  John,  son  of  Moses,  (6,)  settled  near  his  father,  m.  Olive,  dau.  of 
Samuel  Curtis,  March  14,  1745.  Ch. :  I.  John,  b.  March  3,  1746  ;  II. 
Amasa,  b.  Jan.  15,  1748,  m.  Esther  Barker,  and  had  Miles,  b.  1772, 
Lyman,  b.  1774,  Eneas,  b.  1776.  He  settled  in  Plymouth.  HI.  Joel, 
b.  Aug.  19,  1750,  m.  and  settled  in  Plymouth.  He  had  Linus,  Ran- 
som, Betsey,  Erastus  and  Amanda;  all  dead  except  Ransom  and  Bet- 
sey. IV.  Enos,  b.  July  12,  1752;  V.  Obed,  b.  Aug.  29,  1754;  VL 
Olive,  b.  March  29,  1758,  m.  Elnathan  Ives;  VH.  Lettis,  b.  1760,  d. 
1761 ;  VIH.  Lettis,  b.  May  27,  1763,  ra.  Ira  Pond;  IX.  Jared,  b.  July 
8, 1765.  He  is  living  and  has  a  fiimily  in  Plymouth  ;  X.  Sally,  b.  Aug- 
20,  1768,  m.  Stephen  Seymour  ;  XL  Curtis,  b.  Feb.  16,  1770,  d.  young 


4:68  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBURT. 

9.  Moses,  son  of  Moses,  (6,)  m.  Dec.  24,  1753,  Hannah  Dunbar  of 
Wallingford,  and  had  :  I.  Asa,  b.  Sept.  30,  1754  ;  II.  Caleb,  b.  Oct.  22, 
1756,  d.  1757  ;  III.  A  daughter,  b.  April  1,  1758  ;  IV.  Moses,  b.  May 
12,  1760. 

10.  I  have  not  been  able  to  find  the  connection  of  the  following  with 
the  preceding.  I  presume,  however,  they  are  descended  from  Samuel, 
(2.)  Capt.  Thomas  B.,  son  of  Ebenezer  of  New  Haven,  settled  in  Wa- 
terbury.  His  first  four  ch.  are  recorded  at  New  Haven,  the  others  at 
Waterbury.  He  was  the  firsi  captain  in  Northbury  society.  He  d. 
Jan.  2,  1778,  and  his  wid.  Mary  d.  April,  1792.  Ch. :  I.  David,  b. 
Nov.  2,  1722  ;  II.  Reuben,  b.  March  9,  1724-5  ;  III.  Moses,  b.  June 
30,  1727  ;  IV.  Mary,  b.  Sept.  7,  1729,  d.  1750;  V.  Submit,  b.  1731,  d. 
1750  ;  VI.  Experience,  b.  Jan.  3, 1734-5 ;  VII.  Lydia,  July  6,  1737,  m. 
Stephen  Blakeslee,  Jan.  1757;  VIII.  Esther,  b.  Aug,  6,  1739;  IX. 
Abigail,  b.  Dec.  22,  1741. 

11.  David,  son  of  Capt.  Thomas,  (10,)  m.  Nov.  29,  1743,  Phebe 
Todd  of  New  Haven,  who  d.  Oct.  4,  1744.  He  m.  2d,  Abigail,  dau.  of 
Jonathan  How,  May  18,  1752,  who  d.  May  6,  1799.  Ch. :  I.  Thomas, 
b.  Sept.  17,  1744,  m.  Lydia  Bradley,  Aug.  14,  1764,  and  had  Aseneth, 
b.  March  28,  1765;  Bethiah,  b.  March  30,  1767;  Chloe,  b.  Feb.  13, 
1769  ;  Mabel,  b.  March  31,  1771  ;  II.  Eli,  b.  March  22, 1753,  m.  L.  Cur- 
tis, Oct.  31,  1773,  and  had  Prue,  b.  June  25,  1775,  and  Orpha,  b.  Nov- 
3,  1776  ;  III.  Asa,  b.  May  23,  1756  ;  IV.  Phebe,  b.  June  14,  1758  ;  V. 
Ede,  b.  Oct.  21,  1760,  d.  1771 ;  VI.  Bede,  b.  Nov.  9,  1762  ;  VII.  Adna, 
b.  Jan.  31,  1765 ;  VIII.  David,  b.  July  22,  1771. 

12.  Redbei^,  son  of  Capt.  Thomas,  (10,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Barnabas 
Ford,  Sept.  19,  1748.  Ch. :  I.  Ruth,  b.  Feb.  4,  1749;  II.  Submit,  b- 
Feb.  14,  1751;  III,  Silas,  b.  Nov.  30,1752;  IV.  Enos,  b.  May  11, 
1755 ;  V.  Lois,  b.  Oct.  30, 1757  ;  VI.  Eunice,  b.  Feb.  14,  1760. 

13.  MosES,  son  of  Capt.  Thomas,  (10,)  m.  Nov.  17,  1746,  Mehitable, 
dau.  of  Gideon  Allen.  Ch.  :  L  Hezekiah,  b.  Jan  27,  1748  ;  II.  Keziah, 
b.  Sept.  20, 1749,  d.  in  1755;  IH.  Amos,  b.  Jan.  10,  1752,  d.  1755  ; 
IV.  Mary,  b.  Feb.  20,  1754  ;  V.  Keziah,  b.  May  21,  1756  ;  VI.  Rachel, 
March  31,  1758  ;  VIL  Vodice,  b.  July  4,  1760,  d.  1760;  VIH.  Vodice, 
b.  Sept.  8,  1761 ;  IX.  Amos,  b.  Nov.  26,  1763  ;  X.  Zuar,  b.  Feb.  1766  ; 
XL  Grace,  b.  July  21,  1768. 

14.  Jacob  Blakeslee  had  the  following  ch.,  four  of  whom  are  re- 
corded at  New  Haven.  He  removed  to  Waterbury,  where  his  two 
last  ch.  are  recorded.  He  d.  March  25,  1767.  Ch.:  I.  Abner,  b.  May 
15,  1731 ;  H.  Anna,  b.  Oct.  6,  1733  ;  IIL  Gad,  b.  Dec.  13,  1735  ;  IV. 
Asher,  b.  May  23,  1738  ;  V.  Noah,  b.  Dec.  13, 1740  ;  VL  Sarah,  b.  Aug. 
19,  1743. 


APPENDIX. 


469 


15.  Abner,  son  of  Jacob,  (14,)  m.  Thankful,  dau.  of  Samuel  Peck, 
Sept.  25,  1*755,  and  had  :  I.  Samuel,  b.  Nov.  22,  1V56;  II.  Jacob,  b. 
Sept.  14,  1758;  III.  A  son,  b.  Sept.  4,  1761,  d.  young;  IV.  Clement, 
b.  June  30,  1763  ;  V.  Micajah,  b.  April  22,  1766  ;  VI.  Ziba,  b.  July  9, 
1768;  VII.  Abner,  b.  May  21, 1771. 

16.  AsHER,  son  of  Jacob,  (14,)  ra.  Oct.  26,  1762,  Mary,  dau.  of  John 
Huraaston  of  Litchfield,  and  d.  May  3,  1814.  Ch. :  I.  Selah,  b.  Jan.  30, 
1764;  II.  Salmon,  b.  Jan.  30,  1766  ;  III.  Anna,  b.  Nov.  15,  1767;  IV. 
Gad,  b.  Jan.  10,  1770;  V.  Asher,  b.  Nov.  17,  1771. 

BRONSON. 

1.  John  Bronson  of  Hartford  and  Farmigton,  bad  ch. :  Jacob,  John, 
Isaac,  Abraham,  Mary,  Dorcas  and  Sarab.     (See  p.  137.) 

2.  Jacob,  son  of  John,  (l,)had  Samuel,  Jacob,  of  Kensington,  Roger, 
of  New  Milford,  Isaac,  of  Lyme,  Elizabeth  and  Rebecca. 

3.  John,  son  of  John,  (1,)  was  one  of  the  first  settlers  of  Waterbury. 
Ch.:  John,  Sarah,  Dorothy,  Ebenezer,  William,  Moses  and  Grace.  (See 
p.  138.) 

4.  Serj.  Isaac,  son  of  John,  (1,)  had,  I.  Isaac;  II.  John;  III.  Samuel ; 
IV.  Mary;  V.  Joseph;  VL  Thomas;  VIL  Ebenezer;  VIII.  Sarah; 
IX.  Mercy.     (See  p.  140,  and  Cothren's  Woodbury,  p.  505.) 

5.  MosES,  son  of  John,  (3,)  had  ch. :  I.  Eunice,  b.  Dec.  23,  1714,  m. 
Eliakim  Welton  ;  IL  Sarah,  b.  Sept.  2, 1717,  m.  John  Warner;  III.  Na- 
than, b.  Sept.  5,  1719,  m. Williams,  went  to  Alford;  IV.  Martha,  b. 

June  14,  1721,  m. Hill  ;  V.  Elnathan,  b.  Oct.  2,  1723,  m.  Rachel 

Hill ;  VI.  Charity,  and  VIL  Commfort,  twins,  b.  Mar.  29, 1726,    Comfort, 

m. Martin  ;  VIII.  Esther,  b.  Feb.  6,  1728,  m. Peck;  IX.  Jeru 

sha,  b.  Feb.  9, 1730,  ra.  Thomas  Williams  ;  X.  Jemima,  b.  May  25,  1732 
XL  William,  b.  May  30,  1734,  went  to  Alford,  Mass;  XII.  Moses,  b, 
June  19,  1736  ;  XIIL  Naomi,  b.  March  28,  1739,  m.  Jonathan  Hughes, 

6.  Isaac,  son  of  Isaac,  (4,)  had  ch. :  I.  Jerusha,  b.  Nov.  8,  1703,  m, 
Paul  Welch  of  New  Milford ;  IL  Isaac,  b.  Mar.  29,  1707 ;  IIL  Anna,  b 
Aug.  23,  1709,  m.  1st,  Daniel  How,  2d,  Isaac  Tuttle;  IV.  Josiah,  b 
June,  1713  ;  V.  Mary,  b.  May  29,  1716,  m.  James  Hine  of  New  M 
ford;  VL  Nathan,  b.  May,  1719,  d.  1722;  VIL  James,  b.  Oct.  27 
1721,  d.  1725;  VIIL  Patience,  b.  April  14,  1725;  IX.  James,  b 
Oct.  22,  1727. 

7.  Lt.  John,  son  of  Isaac,  (4,)  had  cb. :  I.  Mary,  b.  April  9,  1698,  m. 
1st,  Samuel  Porter,  2d,  John  Barnes,  and  d.  1774  ;  IL  John,  b.  April  23, 
1701  ;  III.  Hannah,  b.  Oct.  13,  1704,  m.  Nathan  Gaylord,  lived  in  New 
Milford;  IV.  Jemima,    b.  Aug.   27,   1706,    m.    Stephen    Hopkins;  V. 


470  HISTOEY    OF   WATERBrET. 

Joseph,  b.  JulylS,  1V09  ;  VI.  Benjamin,  b.  Oct.  2,  1711  ;  VII.  Tamer, 
b.  March  14,  1V30,  m.  Joseph  Nichols ;  VIII.  Ezra,  b.  April  24,  1732  ; 
IX.  Phebe,  b.  Marcb  23,  1734,  m.  Nathaniel  Richardson. 

8.  Lt.  Thomas,  son  of  Isaac,  (4,)  had  ch, :  I.  Thomas,  b.  Jan.  5,  1710- 
11;  II.  Stephen,  b.  Nov.  25,  1712,  d.  Dec.  30,  1712;  III.  Elizabeth, 
b.  April  8,  1714,  d.  1715  ;  IV.  Elizabeth,  b.  April  24, 1716,  m.  Ebenezer 
Warner. 

9.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Isaac,  (4,)  had  ch.:  T.  Susanna,  b.  Ap.  29,  1718, 
m.  William  Adams;  II.  Andrew,  b.  Nov.  23,  1720;  III.  Mary,  b.  Oct. 
1723,  m.  Jonathan  Baldwin  and  d.  May  17,  1821  ;  IV.  Samuel,  b.  Mar. 
16,  1726,  d.  1726;  V.  Ebenezer,  b.  Oct.  9,  1730,  d.  1730  ;  VI.  Thant- 
fiil,  b.  Oct.  15,  1733,  d.  1750;  VII.  Ebenezer,  b.  Feb.  1,  1738. 

10.  Elnathan,  son  of  Moses,  (5,)  m.  wid.  Rachel  Hill  of  New  Fair- 
field, Dec.  26,  1744.  He  had  ch.:  I.  Jesse,  b.  Sept.  11,  1745;  II.  Es- 
ther, b.  Sept.  22,  J  747  ;  III.  Jerusha,b.  Jan.  15,  1749-50  ;  IV.  Hannah, 
b.  Feb.  29,  1751-2  ;  V.  Joseph,  b.  Dec.  3,  1753. 

11.  Nathan,  son  of  Moses,  (5,)  m.  Obedience,  dau.  of  Thomas  Wil- 
liams, Feb.  22,  1749-50.  She  d.  March  13,  1753,  and  he  m.  2d,  wid. 
Abigail  Lewis,  June  29,  1769,  who  d.  Nov.  17,  1800.  Ch. :  I.  Reuben, 
b.  Nov.  28,  1750  ;  II.  a  dau.  b.  Feb.  17,  1753. 

12.  Isaac,  son  of  Isaac,  (6,)  m.  Eunice,  dau.  of  Thomas  Richards, 
July  3,  1734,  who  d.  Sept.  6,  1749,  and  he  m.  Abigail,  wid.  of  Caleb 
Munson,  Nov.  22,  1750,  and  d.  Dec.  7, 1799,  a.  93.  His  ch,  were,  I.  Lois, 
b.  Jan.  26,  1735,  m.  Isaac  Prichard  of  Waterbury,  d.  1824  ;  II.  Isaac, 
b.  Oct.  2,  1736  ;  IIL  Hannah,  b.  Jan.  31,  1738-9,  m.  Timothy  Clark, 
d.  1815;  IV.  Lydia,  b.  June  29,  1741,  d.  Sept.  1749  ;  V.  EH,  b.  June 
30,  1743  ;  VL  Patience,  b.  Dec.  12,  1746,  d.  Sep.  6,  1749  ;  VIL  Setb, 
b.  Dec.  7,  1748  ;  VHL  Titus,  b.  Oct.  15,  1751 ;  IX.  Abigail,  b.  Aug. 
12,  1753,  m.  Ambrose  Ilickox. 

13.  Lt.  JosiAH,  son  of  Isaac,  (6,)  m.  Dinah,  dau.  of  John  Sutliff,  July 
23,  1735.  She  d.  Sept.  10,  1736,  and  he  ra.  Sarah,  wid.  of  David 
Leavenworth  of  Woodbury,  May  15,  1740,  who  d.  Aug.  28,  1767,  and 
he  m.  3d,  Rebecca,  wid.  of  Moses  Hurlbut  of  Woodbury,  Dec.  23,  1767. 
She  d.  June  6,  1797,  and  he  m.  4th,  wid.  Huldah  Williams,  June  12, 
1798.  He  was  born  at  Breakneck.  Blest  by  nature  with  a  robust 
constitution,  a  cheerful,  buoyant  spirit  and  an  iron  will,  he  was  emi- 
nently fitted  to  grapple  with  the  many  difficulties  incident  to  the  times 
in  which  he  lived.  He  was  shrewd,  calculating  and  social ;  became  a 
lieutenant,  secured  wealth,  aud  obtained  an  honorable  position  in  soci- 
ety. With  less  of  the  puritan  strictness  which  characterized  most  men 
of  his  day,  he  was  a  professor  of  religion,  and  died,   at  a  good  old 


APPENDIX.  471 

age,  Feb.  20,  1804.  His  cb,  were,  I.  Lucy,  b.  Sept.  10,  1736,  m. 
James  Porter  of  Middlebury  ;  11.  David,  b.  June  25,  1741;  III.  Abel, 
b.  May  30,  1743,  a  pbysician;  IV.  Zuba,  b.  April  28,  1745,  m.  Abner 
Munson;  V.  Ruben,  b.  June  5,  1747  ;  VI.  Thaddeus,  b.  July  22,  1749  ; 
Vir.  Josiab,  b.  Feb.  1,  1751-2  ;  VIII.  Elijah,  b.  May  15,  1755. 

14.  James,  son  of  Isaac,  (6,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Josiah  Brocket  of 
Walliugford,  Aug.  22,  1750.  Ch. :  I.  Roswell,  b.  Sept.  9,  1751 ;  II. 
Sarah,  b.  Jan.  5,  1754,  m.  John  Adams;  III.  Levi,  b.  June  12,  1757  ; 
IV.  Asahel,  b.  Nov.  28,  1759;  V.  Thankful,  b.  Mar.  5,  1762,  ni.  Amos 
Hinman  ;  VI.  Jesse,  b.  July  1,  1763. 

15.  John,  son  of  John,  (7,)  m.  Comfort,  dau.  of  William  Baldwin  of 
Stratford,  March  28,  1728.  He  lived  at  Jerico,  ou  the  Naugaluck,  in 
Northbury,  till  1759,  when  he  removed  to  Nine  Partners,  N.  Y.,  and  be- 
came a  Baptist  deacon.  Ch.:  I.  Rhoda,  b.  March  30,  1729,  m.  Joshua 
Graves;  IL  Amos,  b.  Feb.  3,  1730-1  ;  IIL  Hannah,  b.  March  6,  1734, 
m.  David  Foot;  IV.  Thankful,  b.  Sept.  6,  1736,  m.  Moses  Foot  of 
Waterbury,  Aug.  12,  1756,  d.  Sept.  5,  1757  ;  V.  Mary,  b.  Feb.  25, 
1738-9,  m.  x\aron  Foot  of  Harwinton  and  Sheffield,  d.  Feb.  10, 
1824;  VL  John,  b.  Dec.  22,  1742;  VIL  Chloe,  b.  Dec.  29,  1745, 
m.  Col.  Barker  of  Nine  Partners,  N.  Y. 

16.  Joseph,  son  of  John,  (7,)  ra.  Anna,  dau,  of  Rev.  John  Soutbmayd, 
June  1,  1732.  She  d.  Aug.  12,  1749,  and  he  m.  2d,  Mary,  dau.  of 
Lt.  Gershom  Fulford,  May  2,  1750,  and  d.  Sept.  19,  1771.  Ch. :  L  Me- 
liscent,  b.  Dec.  24,  1734,  d,  1735  ;  IL  Eldad,  b.  July  1,  1736,  d.  1749 ; 
IIL  Desire,  b.  July  9,  1738,  m.  Jonathan  Guernsey;  IV.  Seba,  b.  Sept. 
23,  1740  ;  V.  Anne,  b.  May  22,  1751,  m.  Herman  Munson;  VL  Bela, 
b.  May  7,  1757.  I  find  in  addition  to  the  preceding  the  births  of  no 
less  than  six  still  born  children  on  record. 

17.  Benjamin,  son  of  John,  (7,)  m.  Lois,  dau.  of  Thomas  Richards, 
March  14,  1738,  and  d.  Nov.  16,  1745.  His  wid.  m.  Silas  Hotchkiss. 
Ch. :  L  Hannah,  b.Nov.  16,  1738,  d.  same  month ;  IL  Ruth,  b.  Sept.  30, 
1739,  ra.  Samuel  Scovill;  IIL  Chloe,  b.  Dec.  2,  1741,  d.  1742;  IV. 
Samuel,  b.  Dec.  10,  1742;  V.  Benjamin,  b.  May  8,  1746,  d.  Dec.  22, 
1765. 

18.  Capt.  Ezra,  son  of  John,  (7.)  He  was  one  of  the  honored  men 
of  his  time  ;  was  town  clerk,  town  treasurer,  a  representative  to  the  As- 
sembly, a  justice  of  the  peace,  and  commissary  in  the  Revolution.  He 
m.  Susanna,  dau.  of  Thomas  Judd,  Sep.  6,  1753,  and  d.  Sept.  1,  1795. 
She  d.  Oct.  13,  1828,  aged  90.  Ch. :  L  Lt.  Michael,  b.  March  25, 1754  ; 
II.  Hannah,  b.  March  26,  1757,  m.  Wm,  Leavenworth  ;  IIL  Mark,  b. 
Aug,  4,  1762  ;  IV,  Susanna,  b,  March  6,  1766,  m.  Stephen  "VVelton  ;  V. 


473  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUEY. 

Aune,  b.  Dec.  26,   lllO,  m.  Joseph  Cook;  VI.  Meliscent,  b.  June  27, 
1*773,  m.  William  Durand. 

19.  Thomas,  Esq.,  son  of  Lt.  Thomas,  [S,)  m.  Susanna,  dau.  of  Rev. 
John  Southmayd,"  Sept.  25,  1734.  She  d.  Aug.  13, 1741.  He  then  m.' 
Anna,  dau.  of  Stephen  Hopkins,  Esq.,  Jan.  9,  1746,  aud  d.  June  25, 
1759.  Ch. :  I.  Stephen,  b.  June  30,  1735;  H.  Susanna,  b.  Dec.  7, 
1736,  m.  Rev.  Elijah  Sill;  HI.  Daniel,  b.  March  8,  1739  ;  IV.  Samuel, 
b.  June  21,  1741,  d.  1741  ;  V.  David,  b.  Sept.  25,  1748,  d.  1750;  VI. 
Thomas,  b.  March  10,  1751;  VII.  Anne,  b.  Sept.  28,  1752,  m.  Joseph 
Upson  ;  VIII.  Elizabeth,  b.  Oct.  30,  1755  ;  IX.  Ruth,  b.  Feb.  23,  1759, 
m.  Dr.  Jesse  Upson. 

20.  Dea.  Andrew,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (9,)  m.  Marj^,  dau.  of  Lt.  John 
Scovill,  Feb.  9, 1745-6,  and  d.  Dec.  1799.  Ch. :  I.  Amasa,  b.  June  8, 
1746,  d.  1752;  II.  Esther,  b.  Jan.  21,  1747-8,  m.  Daniel  Bronson,  in 
1770  ;  III.  Amasa,  b.  April  1,  1750,  d.  1753  ;  IV.  Mary,  b.  April  23, 
1752  ;  V.  Thankful,  b.  Aug  27,  1755  ;  VI.  Lucy,  b.  June  27,  1760,  m. 
Samuel  Porter;  VIL  Samuel,  b.  Nov.  1,  1762;  VIII.  Sylvia,  b.  Nov. 
20,  1764;  IX.  Andrew. 

21.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (9,)  m.  Miriam,  dau.  of  Richaid 
Nichols,  April  7,  1763,  and  d.  May  6,  1808.  His  wife  d.  July  12, 1812. 
Ch. :  L  Joseph,  b.  March  1,  1764  ;  IL  Amzi,  b.  April  12,  1765  ;  IK. 
Sarah,  b.  Nov.  27,  1766,  d.  1767;  IV.  Sarah,  b.  Dec.  16,  1767;  V. 
Susan,  b.  May  7,  1769,  d.  1782  ;  VL  Ebenezer,  b.  Nov.  14,  1771,  ra. 
and  had  five  or  six  ch.,  and  d.  July,  1840,  in  the  State  of  New  York; 
VII.  Harvey,  b.  Feb.  21,  1774;  VIIL  Clarissa,  d.  Aug.  26,  1778  ;  IX. 
Clarinda;  X.  Isaac.  The  last  three  were  b.  April  18,  1778;  XL 
Susa,  b.  Feb.  14,  1784. 

22.  Capt.  Isaac,  son  of  Isaac,  (12.)  He  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Josiah 
Brocket  of  VVaUingford,  Feb.  13,  1755,  and  d.  April  15,  1826,  aged  90. 
His  wife  d.  Aug.  1,  1816.  Ch.  :  L  Eunice,  b.  Dec.  4, 1755,  d.in  1775  ; 
II.  Mary,  b.  Sept.  15, 1757,  m.  Eblem  Hill,  supposed  to  be  living  in  Ash- 
tabula Co.,  Ohio,  at  this  time;  HI.  Isaac,  b.  March  10,  1760,  (see  p. 
370  ;)  IV.  Laban,  b.Feb.  14,  1762,  d.  1801 ;  V.  Ethel,  b.  July  22,  1765, 
(see  p.  374  ;)  VL  Chauncey,  b.  Dec.  31,  1767,  d.  1768  ;  VIL  Hannah  b. 
May,  1769,  m.  Eli  Hine,  Oct.  30,  1792;  VIIL  Sarah,  b.  March  21, 
1775  ;  IX.  Virtue,  b.  March  22,  1778,  m.  Nancy  Carrington,  d.  1815 
or  1816,  in  Ontario  Co.,  N.  Y. 

23.  Eli,  son  of  Isaac,  (12,)  m.  Mehitable,  dau.  of  Capt.  Enos  At- 
water  of  Wallingford,  March  4,  1773,  and  d.  Sept.  30,  1816.  Ch.  :  L 
Enos,  b.  March  31,  1774,  (see  p.  384.)  IL  Mehitable, b. Nov.  29,  1775,  d. 
1777  ;  IlL  Mehitable,  b.  May  7,  1778,  m.  Eli  Thompson  ;  IV.  Diantha, 


APPEISIDIX,  473 

1).  April  11,  1780,  ra.  Amos  Curtiss  ;  V.  Capt.  Pliilo,  b.  May  15, 1782,  m. 
Ciiloe,  dau.  of  Major  Samuel  Bronson.  He  was  a  deacon,  a  frequent 
representative  to  the  Legislature,  and  most  excellent  man,  and  d.  at 
Geneva,  N.  Y.,  Nov.  29,  1855  ;  VI.  A  son,  b.  Oct.  31,  1784,  d.  young. 

24.  Dea.  Seth,  son  of  Isaac,  (12,)  ra.  Cbloe,  dau.  of  George  Prich- 
ard,  Nov.  27,  1770,   and  d.  Oct.   11,  1828.     His  wid.  d.  Jan.  10,  1805. 

Ch. :  I.  Anna,  b.  Jan.  19, 1773,  m. Kelsey  of  Jefferson  Co.,  N.  Y. ; 

II.  Chloe,  b.  Dec.  28,  1777,  m.  David  Tyler  of  Middlebury,  went  to  Ptut- 
land,  N.  Y.,  and  still  lives  ;  III.  Jonas,  b.  Sept.  25,  1779,  m.  Melinda 
Baldwin,  is  deacon  of  a  Congregational  church,  and  now  lives  in  But- 
land,  Jefferson  Co.,  N.  Y. ;  IV.  Marcus,  b.  Sept.  8,  1781,  m.  Rebecca 
Thompson,  and  is  now  living  in  Middlebury  ;  V.  Asa.  (?) 

25.  Titus,  son  of  Isaac,  (12,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Moses  Cook,  Feb. 
11,  1779.  Ch. :  I.  Jairus,  b.  Dec.  9,  1779,  m.  Irene  Mallory  of  Wood- 
bury, Jan.  11,  1804,  is  now  living  in  Talmadge,  Ohio.  Ch. :  Charles  C, 
Butler,  Zuria,  Bennet,  Maria,  Cornelia  and  Harriet.  II.  Horace,  b.  Feb. 
15,  1782,  m.  Charry  Thompson,  is  now  living  in  Middleburv.  Ch. : 
Alfred  H.,  Horace  C,  John  T.,  Eliza,  Mary,  Caroline,  Sarah  and  Joseph, 
in.  Augustus,  b.  June  24,  1784,  m.  Nancy  Bradley,  d.  in  Ohio,  1838  ; 
IV.  Esther,  b.  Oct.  19,  178G,  m.  John  Hine,  is  a  widow,  lives  in  New 
Haven.  Ch.:  Harriet  and  Mary.  V.  Titus,  b.  Nov.  27,  1788,  ra.  Sally 
Richardson,  d.  in  1853.  He  was  a  pioneer  settler  at  Ann  Arbor  and 
Kalamazoo,  Mich.,  and  Davenport,  Iowa,  d.  Jan.  1853,  while  on  a  visit 
to  his  native  place,  Middlebury.  VI.  Hannah,  b.  April  18,  1791,  d.  in 
1851.  VII.  Sally,  b.  Sept.  13,  1794,  ra.  A.  Benham,  and  is  now  living  in 
Middlebury;  Ch. :  Wi!liam,John,Eno?,  Sarah  and  Franklin.  VIII.  Leon- 
ard, b.  June  24,  1797,  m.  Nancy  Ricliardson,  wid.  of  M.  Piatt.  Ch. : 
Julia  Maria,  b.  Jan.  12,  1820,  d.  Sept.  1841,  Geo.  F.,  b.  Jan.  21,  1821, 
Catharine,  d.  young,  Isaac  P.,  b.  May  22,  1826,  and  Edward  L. 

26.  David,  son  of  Lt.  Josiah,  (13,)  m.  Anna,  dau.  of  Daniel  Porter, 
March  1,  1772,  and  d.  July  23,1799.     His  wid.  d.  Nov.  16,  1814.     Ch. : 

I.  Hannah,  b.  Nov.  10,  1774,  m.  E.  Stone;  IL  David,  b.  Feb.  3,  1777  ; 
IIL  Anna,  b.  Nov.  3,  1778,  m.  Zerah  Brown. 

27.  Doct.  Abel,  son  of  Lt.  Josiah,  (13,)  m.  Lydia  Benham,  Dec.  15, 
1768,  Avho  d.  June  6,  1782.  He  ra.  2d,  Esther  Hawkins,  Oct.  24, 
1784,  and  d.  Aug.  2,  1805.     Ch. :  L  Sarah,  b.  June  2,  1871,  d.  young ; 

II.  Abel,b.  Oct.  1, 1775 ;  IIL  A  son,  b.  Feb.  2, 1786,  d.  next  day ;  IV.  Lydia, 
b.  March  21,  1787,  m.  Col.  E.  Judd;  V.  Elvira,  b.  Aug.  1789,  m.  Joseph 
Hall ;  VL  Sarah, b.  April  1,  1791,  m.  Eben  Abbott;  VIL  Joseph  Perry, 
b.  Sept.  25, 1794,  is  living  in  Watertown  ;  VIII.  Homer,  b.  March  20, 
1796,  now  living  in  Egremont,  Mass. 


474  niSTOKY  OF  waterbuey. 

28.  Reuben,  son  of  Lt.  Josiab,  (13,)  m.  Jemima,  dau.  of  Lt.  Samuel 
Porter,  Nov.  1,  l770.  Ch. :  I.  Edmund,  b.  July,  1V72,  d.  1774;  II. 
Samuel,  b.  Sept.  1774. 

29.  Thaddeus,  son  of  Lt.  Josiab,  (13,)  m.  Abigail  Wilmot,  Dec.  10, 
1772,  wbo  d.  May  25,  1793,  and  he  ra.  2d,  Anne  Hitchcock,  Jan.  5, 
1794,  and  d.  March  2,  1825.  Ch. :  I.  Abigail,  b.  June  1,  1773,  m.  D. 
Prichard  ;  II.  Uri,  b.  May  30,  1778,  m.  Anna  Atwood,  Dec.  5,  1799  ;  III. 
Olive,  b.  March  17, 1779,  m.  David  Howe ;  IV.  Lucy,  b.  March  21, 1781,  m. 
Amasa  Gaylord  ;  V.  Jerusha,  b.  May  21,  1784,  m.  Sherman  Curtis  ;  VI. 
Jared,  b.  June  18, 1791,  lives  in  Middlebury ;  VIL  Ruth,  b.  May  17, 1793, 
ra.  Stephen  Atwood  of  Woodbury. 

30.  JosiAH,  son  of  Lt.  Josiah,  (13,)  m.  Tabitha,  dau.  of  Ezekiel  Tut- 
tle,  Jan.  20,  1780.  Ch. :  L  Truman,  b.  Jan.  5,  1781,  d.  in  Ohio;  H. 
Alvin,b.May  19,  1783,  (see  p.  450  ;)  IIL  Josiah,  b.  Sep.  19, 1786,  lives  at 
Onondaga,  N.  Y. ;  IV.  Edward,  b.  Sep.  1, 1789,  resides  at  Cleveland,  Ohio ; 
V.  Nancy,  b.  Feb.  27,  1793,  lives  at  Onondaga,  N.  Y. 

31.  Elijah,  son  of  Lt.  Josiah,  (13,)  m.  Lois,  dau.  of  Stephen  Bun- 
nell of  Wallingford,  March  10,  1778.  Ch. :  I.  Giles,  b.  Feb.  13,  1780, 
d.  leaving  one  son  and  two  daus. ;  II.  Irene,  b.  May  28, 1 782,  m.  Roswell 
Hull  of  Killingworth,  resides  there,  has  four  sons,  and  two  daus. ;  III. 
Sabra,  b.  March  9,  I784,m.  Jonathan  Blake  of  Winchester,  resides  there, 
has  one  son  and  two  daus. ;  IV.  Selah,  b.  Feb.  26,  1786,  d.  at  Oswego, 
N.  Y.,  had  one  son  and  one  dau,;  Y.  Silas,  b.  Feb.  15,  1788,  resides  in 
the  city  of  New  York.  His  father  (a  Middlebury  farmer)  having  a 
large  family,  it  became  necessary  for  the  children,  at  an  early  age,  to 
look  out  for  their  own  support.  Silas  had  only  a  limited  common 
school  education,  and  for  four  years  followed  the  trade  of  a  carpenter, 
and  joiner.  Not  satisfied  with  his  future  prospects,  he  resolved  to  try 
his  fortune  in  the  State  of  Georgia,  where  he  followed  the  mercantile 
business  for  fifteen  years.  In  the  year  1830,  he  removed  to  the  city  of 
New  York,  and  commenced  the  business  of  an  importing  and  jobbing 
dry  goods  merchant.  In  1835,  he  suffered  severely  from  the  memor- 
able fire  of  that  year.  But  by  great  energy  and  perseverance,  he  soon 
overcame  his  losses.  As  his  business  increased,  his  health  becoming 
somewhat  impaired,  he  gave  up  his  dry  goods  business,  and  has  for  the 
last  few  years  devoted  himself  to  a  commission  business,  which  he  still 
continues.  He  is  unmarried.  VI.  Elijah,  b.  Jan.  1,  1794,  resides  in 
Tenn.,  has  five  sons  and  two  daus.;  VII.  Amos,  b.  Nov.  23,  1795, 
resides  in  Tenn.,  has  one  son  and  one  dau. ;  VIII.  Polly,  b.  Dec.  3, 
1797,  m.  Henry  S.  Wheeler,  lives  in  Middlebury. 

32.  Roswell,  son  of  James,    (14,)   m.   Susanna,   dau.   of   William 


APPENDIX.  4:75 

Adaras,  Nov.  25,  IVTS.  Ch. :  I.  Benoni,  b.  Sept.  25,  1114,  d.  1777; 
II.  Roswell,  b.  Jan.  26,  1777,  lives  ia  Clinton,  N.  Y.;  III.  Mille,  b.  Feb. 
2,  1779,  d.  Aug.  1826;  IV.  N"ancy,  m.  Stephen  Stone,  d.  1828;  V. 
Garry,  b.  1791,  m.  Maria  Richardson,  d.  in  1841. 

33.  AsAHEL,  Esq.,  son  of  James,  (14,)  lived  in  Middlebury,  m.  Esther, 
dau.  of  Stephen  Upson,  Feb.  12,  1784,  d.  April  22,  1850.  Ch. :  I. 
Sally,  b.  Dec.  1,  1784,  m.  Daniel  Tyler  of  Middlebury;  II.  William,  b. 
May  27,  1787,  m.  Almira  Tyler,  dau.  of  Roswell,  d.  Sept.  1856  ;  III. 
James,  d.  June,  1816  ;  IV.  Doct.  Tracy,  lives  in  Newton,  Ohio ;  V.  and 
VI.  Almy  and  Amy  ;  Alray  m.  Lyman  Camp  of  Middlebury,  Amy  d. 
young;  VII.  and  VIII.  A&abel  and  Esther,  b.  1800  ;  Asahel  d.  young, 
Esther  d.  1826. 

34.  Jesse,  son  of  James,  (14,)  m.  Esther,  dau.  of  Xatlian  Osborn  of 
Woodbury,  Sept.  30,  1784.  Ch. :  I.  Benoni,  b.  March  1,  1786;  II. 
Marshal,  b.  Nov.  22,  1787;  III.  Alvari,  (dau.)  b.  Aug.  30,  1789;  IV. 
Leman,  b.  Jan.  15,  1792. 

35.  Capt.  Amos,  son  of  John,  (15,)  m.  Anna,  dau.  of  Jacob  Blakeslee, 
June  3,  1751,  and  settled  on  the  homestead  at  Jerico,  which  was  given 
him  by  his  father  in  1759.  He  was  a  prominent  man  in  Northbury, 
now  Plymouth,  and  d.  Sept.  2,  1819.  Ch. :  I.  Lucy,  b.  Nov.  1,  1752, 
m.  Isaac  Barnes,  d.  at  Camden,  N.  Y. ;  II,  Phebe,  b.  March  30,  1*754,  m. 

1st, Seymour,  2d,  Stephen  Sanford,  and  d.  at  Medina,  Ohio,  in  1835  ; 

IIL  Tamer,  b.  Feb.  1,  1756,  d.  1757;  IV.  Zerah,  b.  Jan.  22,  1758,  m. 
Aaron  Welton,  and  d.  at  Medina,  Ohio,  in  1836  ;  V.  Sylvia,  b.  Feb.  3, 
1760,  d.  April,  1776  ;  VL  Tillotson,b.  Jan.  8,  1762,  (see  p.  376 ;)  VIL 
Noah,  b.  Aug.  6,  1764,  d.  1766;  VIIL  Noah  M.,  b.  July  15,  1767,  m. 
Betsey  Ives  of  Plymouth,  lives  at  Medina,  Ohio,  to  which  place  he  re- 
moved in  1815,  and  became  one  of  the  original  settlers  and  proprietors. 
He  has  been  a  judge  of  one  of  the  Ohio  courts.  IX.  Amos,  b.  Sept.  3, 
1769,  m.  Hannah  Thomas,  d.  at  Springville,  Pa.,  in  1825;  X.  Anna,  b. 
Jan.  20,  1113,  m.  Joseph  Chatfield  Alcox  of  Wolcott ;  XL  Sarah,  b. 
Nov.  3,  1774,  m.  1st,  Solomon  Barker,  2d, Darius  Orton,  and  3d,  Wm. 
Wiatt,  and  d.  at  Medina,  Ohio,  Sept.  18,  1855;  XII.  Sylvia,  b.  Nov. 
22,  1776,  m.  Medad  Alcox  of  Wolcott. 

36.  Seba,  son  of  Joseph,  (16,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Abraham  Eickox, 
July  5,  1764.  They  both  d.  in  Ohio,  in  1816.  Ch  :  L  Levi,  b.  July 
24,  1765,  m.  Sarah  Prindle,  May  23,  1783,  and  had  ten  ch. ;  IL  Olive, 
b.  July  3,  1766 ;  IIL  Ager,  b.  Jan.  1,  1768,  ra.  Clarissa,  dau.  of  Michael 
Bronson,  d.  Dec.  11,  1825  ;  IV.  Joseph,  b.  June  3,  1769  ;  V.  Anna,  b. 
Feb.  5,  1771  ;  VL  Seba,  b.  Sept.  26,  1772  ;  VIL  Herman,  b.  Dec.  18, 
1774;  VIIL  Thomas   G.,  b.    April  19,  1776  ;  IX.  Abraham,  b.  April 


476  niSTOEY  OF  avateebuey. 

11,  17Y8;  X.  Mary,  h.  March  13,  1Y80,  m.  Arc!  Welton ;  XL  Bela, 
b.  April  3,  1782;  XII.— b.  1784  ;  XIII  and  XIV.  Southmayd  and 
Daniel,  b.  Sept.  3,  1786.    Southmayd  d.  April  23,  1814. 

37.  Maj.  Samuel,  son  of  Benjamin,  (17,)  m.  Temperance  Spencer, 
May  30,  1776,  who  d.  July  31,  1785,  and  he  ra.  Huldah  Williams, 
Dec.  1786,  and  d.  July  21,  1813.  Ch:  I.  Benjamin,  b.  March  19, 
1777;  II.  Samuel,  b.  March  31,  1779;  III.  Chloe,  b.  Aug.  5,  1781, 
m.  Philo  Bronson;  IV.  Temperance,  b.  March  18,  1784;  V.  Isaac,  b. 
Aug.  18,  1787,  d.  1787;  VI.,  Sally,  b.  Oct.  14,  1791,  d.  1798  ;  VII. 
Isaac,  b.  Sept.  11,  1793  ;  VIII.  V^illiam,  b.  June  27,  1795,  d.  1795  ; 
IX.  John,  b.  Dec.  29,  1796;  X.Ezra  R.,  b.  Oct.  19,  1801, d.   1805. 

38.  Lt.  Michael,  son  of  Capt.  Ezra,  (18,)  m.  Eunice,  dau.  of  Joseph 
Nichols,  Julys,  1776,  and  d.  July  25,  1822.  His  widow  d.  1841. 
Ch:  I.  Clarissa,  b.  Sept.  30, 1776,  m.  A.  Bronson ;  II.  Horatio  Gates, 
b.  Oct.  2,  1777,  d.  Oct.  23,  1825  ;  III.  Hannah,  b.  Feb.  12,  1780,  m. 
Joel  Scott;  IV.  Ezra,  b.  Dec.  6,  1783. 

39.  Mark,  son  of  Capt.  Ezra,  (18,)  m.  Esther,  dau.  of  Joseph  Hop- 
kins, Sept.  16,  1784,  and  d.  1797.  His  widow  d.  Jan.  19,  1814.  Ch  : 
I.  Henry,  b.  Aug.  4,  1787  ;  Nancy,  b.  June  21,  1789,  m.  Cyrus  Clark, 
Esq.;  III.  a  dau.,  b.  1792,  d.  young;  IV.  Esther,  b.  Jan.  28,  1794,  d. 
1795  ;  V.  Edward. 

40.  Deacon  Stephen,  son  of  Thomas,  Esq.,  (19,)  m.  Sarah,  dau,  of 
Caleb  Ilummaston,  May  17,  1764,  and  d.  Dec.  15,  1809.  His  widow 
Sarah  d.  July  27,  1822.  Ch :  I.  Mercy,  b.  Dec.  17,  1764,  m.  John 
Kingsbury,  Nov.  6,  1794,  and  d.  March  21,  1813  ;  II.  Jesse,  b.  June  9, 
1766,  d.  Feb.  4,  1788,  unmarried ;  III.  John,  b.  Aug.  14,  1768,  d.  Jan. 
22,  1782  ;  IV.  Susanna,  b.  Dec.  26,  1770,  d.  Oct.  21,  1773  ;  V.  Con- 
tent Hummaston,  b.  May  14,  1773,  d.  March  28,  1806,  unmarried; 
VI.  Bennet,  b.  Nov.  14,  1775,  d.  Dec.  11,  1850.  (See  p.  379.)  VII.  Su- 
sanna, b.  April  6,  1780,  m.  Joseph  Burton,  June  23,  1805,  d.  July  14, 
1811. 

41.  Deacon  Daniel,  son  of  Thomas,  Esq.,  (19,)  m.  Esther,  dau.  of 
Dea.  Andrew  Bronson,  July  19,  1770.  She  d.  June  24,  1719,  and  he 
d.  Nov.  2,  1824.  Ch  :  I.  Leva,  b.  March  25,  1771,  d.  1775  ;  IL  Noah, 
b.  Sept.  9,  1773,  m.  Huldah,  dau.  of  Jacob  Sperry,  Dec.  28,  1795. 
Shed.  1829.  He  m.  2d,  Chloe,  dau.  of  Ward  Peck;  IIL  Asa,  b. 
Nov.  8,  1775,  drowned  in  1780;  IV.  Leva,  b.  April  19,  1778,  d.  in 
1800  ;  V.  Balinda,  b.  May  21,  1780,  d.  1798  ;  VL  and  VII.— b.  Nov.  9, 
1782,  d.  the  same  day;  VIIL  Esther,  b.  April  25,  1784,  m.  William 
Comes;  IX.  Orra,  b.  June  3,  1786,  m.  Philander  Porter,  and  d.  Jan. 


APPENDIX.  477 

II,  1836;  X.  Asa,  b.  Sept.  8,  1788,  m.  Rutli  Prindle  ;  XT.  Andrew, 
b.  Dec.  14,  1791,  d.  1792. 

42.  Thomas,  son  of  Thomas,  Esq.,  (19,)  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Capt. 
Samuel  Hickox,  Aug.  25,  1774.  His  wife  d.  March  15,  1813,  and  he 
died  the  next  day.  Ch :  I.  Molly,  b.  March  18,  1775,  m.  Daniel 
Hickox,  d.  March  24,1813;  H.  Sally,  b.  1777,  d.  in  1840;  HI.  Eliza- 
beth, ra.  Titus  Foote  of  Watertown,  March  12,  1804,  d.  Oct.  8,  1841; 
IV.   Anne,  b.  1786,  m.  Bela  Hotchkiss,  d.  April  18,  1840. 

43.  Joseph,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (21,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Doct.  Preserved 
Porter,  Dec.  23, 1784,  and  d.  1851.  His  wife  d.  Sept.  1839.  Ch  :  I. 
Sarah  G.,  b.  July  21,  1785,  d.  1794 ;  H.  Nancy  F.,  b.  Aug.  13,  1787  ; 
HI.  Lavinia,  b.  Sept.  9,  1789;  IV.  Cloe,  b.  Jan.  28,  1791;  Y.  Pre- 
served P.,  b.  May  1,  1794. 

44.  Amasa,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (21,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Samuel  Frost, 
Jr.,  March  31,  1788.  Ch :  I.  Lucina,  b.  Dec.  21,  1789  ;  II.  Billy,  b. 
Nov.  14,  1791,  d.  1794;  III.  Philomela,  b.  Jan.  21,  1794;  IV.  Billy 
A.,  b.  June  14,  1796  ;  V.  Samuel  M.,  b.  Jan.  2,  1800;  VI.  Julius  G., 
b.  Dec.  21,  ISO  I  ;  VII.  Sarah,  b.  Feb.  22,  1805. 

45.  Ethrl,  son  of  Capt.  Isaac,  (22,)  ra.  Hepzibah,  dau.  of  Joseph 
Hopkins,  Esq.,  Dec.  30,  1787.  (See  p.  374.)  Ch  :  I.  and  II.  twin?,  b. 
Sept.  11,1790,  d.  same  day;  HI.  Alfred,  b.  Oct.  13,  1791,  d.  1792; 
IV.  Erastus,  b.  Feb.  18,  1793;  V.Betsey,  b.  May  6,  1795;  VI.  Em- 
ma, b.  Sept.  7,  1797;  VII.  Isaac,  b.  Aug.  19,  1800,  d.  Dec.  31, 
18  00;  VIII.  Isaac  H.   (See  p.  375.) 

46.  Bennet,  son  of  Stephen,  (40,)  ra.  Anne,  dau.  of  Richard  Smith, 
of  Roxbury,  May  11,  1801.  She  d.  March  4,  1819,  and  he  m.  2d, 
Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Dea.  Benjarain  Maltby,  of  Branford,  May,  1820.  She 
d.  June  12,  1840,  and  he  ra.  3d,  Nancy,  dau.  of  Jacob  Dagget,  of  New 
Haven,  May  27,  1841.  He,  Bennet,  d.  Dec.  11,  1850.  (See  p.  379.) 
Ch:  I.  Geoi-ge,  b.  Feb.  27,  1802,  d.  July  21,  1822;  II.  Henry,  b. 
Jan.  30,  1804,  ra.  June  3,  1831,  Sarah  Miles,  dau.  of  Samuel  Lathrop, 
and  grand-dau.  of  Joseph  Lathrop,  D.  D.,  of  West  Springfield,  Mass.  ; 

III.  Jesse,  b.  Feb.  8,  1806,  d.  April  14,  1831,  unmarried.  He  was  a 
physician  in  North  Haven;  IV.  Thomas,  b.  June  4,  1808,  d.  April 
20,  1851;  V.  Elizabeth  Anne,  b.  March  3,  1812,  d.  April  6,  1845, 
unmarried;  VI.  Susanna,  b.  Feb.  26,  1814,  d.  Aug.  12,  1814;  VII. 
Harriet  Maria,  b.  Sept.  13,  1815,  m.  Dec.  8,  1841,  Zina  K.  Murdock, 
of  Madison,  now  of  Meriden ;  VII.  Rebecca  Tainter,  b.  Feb.  10,  1822, 
m.  Douglas  F.  Maltby,  and  d.  Aug.  8,  1845 ;  VIII.  Susan,  b.  Jan. 
19,   1824. 


478  HISTORY   OF   WATERBUET. 


BROWN. 


1.  Francis  Brown  m.  Mary  Edwards  in  England,  came  to  tbis  coun- 
try, and  settled  in  New  Haven.  He  was  one  of  the  company  who  came 
to  New  Haven  in  advance  of  the  Colony,  and  spent  the  winter  of  1637 
and  1638  in  a  hut  located  on  what  is  now  the  corner  of  Church  and 
George  streets.  He  signed  the  Colony  Constitution  in  1639.  Ch. : 
Lydia,  John,  Eleazer,  Samuel  and  Ebenezer. 

2.  Samuel,  son  of  Francis,. (1,)  m.  Mercy  Tuttle,  May  2,  1667.  Ch. : 
I.  Abigail,  b.  March,  11,  1669,  d.  young;  H.  Sarai,  b.  Aug.  8,  1672 ;  HI. 
Rachel,  b.  April  14,  1677  ;  IV.  Francis,  b.  Oct.  7,  1679  ;  V.  Gideon,  b. 
July  12,  1685;  VI.  Samuel,  b.  Oct.  29,  1699. 

3.  Francis,  son  of  Samuel,  (2,)  m.  Hannah  Ailing,  April  11,1705.  Ch. : 
I.John,  b.  May  14, 1706  ;  II.  Samuel,  b.  Oct.  6, 1708  ;  III.  Mehitabel,  b. 
April  9, 1711 ;  IV.  Stephen,  b.  Aug.  10,  1 7 13  ;V.  Timothy,  b.  April  10, 
1716. 

4.  Stephen,  son  of  Francis,  (3,)  m.  Mabel  Bradley,  Sept.  27, 1739.  Ch. : 
I.  Hannah,  b.  Feb.  26,  1740-41  ;  II.  Mabel,  b.  May  26,  1743  ;  III.  Sybil, 
b.  Dec.  28,  1745  ;  IV.  Stephen,  b.  Jan.  15, 1750-61 ;  V.  Olive,  b.  May 
28, 1756  ;  VI.  Rebekah,  b.  May  30,  1757  ;  VII.  Phebe,  b.  July  8,  1759. 

5.  Stephen,  son  of  Stephen,  (4,)  settled  at  Windsor,  m.  Eunice  Loomis, 
Nov.  1775.  Ch. :  I.  James,  b.  Dec.  2, 1 776  ;  II.  Stephen,  b.  April  30, 1778, 
m.  Ruth  M.  Loomis,  d.  in  Bloomfield,  Jan.  27,  1842  ;  III.  Bradley,  b.  Dec. 
13,  1679,  d.  Sept.  16,  1845,  in  Champion,  N.  Y. ;  IV.  Eunice,  b.  Jan. 
29,  1781,  m.  John  Robinson,  and  d.  in  Rochester,  N.  Y.,  Feb.  1846  ;  V. 
Sarah,  b.  Jan.  27,  1782,  m.  N.  Parsons  of  Charlemont,  Mass. ;  VI.  Mar- 
tha, b.  Dec.  23,1784,  m.  Ichabod  Loomis,  is  living  in  Cheshire,  Mass.;' 
VIL  Rebecca,  b.  Dec.  1786,  is  living  in  Bloomfield,  Conn. ;  VIII.  A  son,  b. 
Feb.  11, 1789,  d.  in  infancy  ;  IX.  A  son,  b.  April,  1790,  d.  in  infancy  ;  X. 
Jesse,  b.  May  17, 1791,  now  living  in  Paulding  Co.,'Ohio;  XI.  Melinda,  b. 
Feb.  14, 1795,  m.  Wm.P.Briggs,  d.  in  Richmond,  Vt.,  March  15,  1849  ; 
Xn.  Oliver,  b.Dec.  23,  1798,  now  living  in  Waterbury  ;  XIIL  Mabel  P., 
(by  second  wife,)  b.  Feb.  12, 1812,  resides  in  Granby,  Mass. 

6.  Col.  James,  (see  p.  387,)  son  of  Stephen,  (5,)  settled  in  Waterbury 
about  1798,  m.  Levinia  Welton,  and  d.  July  24,  1848.  Ch. :  I.  Philo,  b. 
Jan.  26,  1803  ;  IL  William,  b.  June  16,  1804  ;  IIL  Mary  Ann,  d.  in 
infancy;  IV.  Augustus,  b.  Aug.  20,  1811  ;  V.  James,  b.  July  2,  1815. 

7.  Oliver,  son  of  Stephen,  (5,)  m.  Lucy  Hicks  of  Cheshire,  Mass., 
Oct.  20,  1824,  and  located  in  Pittsfield,  Mass.  In  May,  1836,  he  re- 
moved to  Waterbury.  Ch. :  I.  Henry,  b.  Nov.  5,  1825,  d.  in  infancy; 
11.  Oliver  J.,  b.  Aug.  9,  1827,  m.  Emily  Latimer  of  Simsbury  ;  IIL 
Lucy  J.,  b.  June  2,  1830. 


APPENDIX,  479 

8.  Philo,  son  of  James,  (6,)  m,  Esther,  dau.  of  Giles  Ives.  Cli. : 
I.  William  Henry,  b.  April  6,  1827,  m.  Ellen  A.  Ives  of  Hartford;  II. 
Cornelia  A.,  b,  April  10,  1834,  m.  Theodore  S.  Buel. 

9.  William,  son  of  James,  (6,)  m.  Sarah  S.,  dau.  of  Judge  Kings- 
bur)',  who  d.  May  30,  1840,  and  he  m.  2d,  Rachel  Vienna,  dau.  of  Asa 
Fenn  of  Middlebury,  March  25,  1844.  Ch. :  I  Marcia  Bronson,  b.  July 
31,  1832,  d.  Dec.  14,  1851 ;  II.  Robert  K.,  b.  Dec.  6,  1833,  m.  Elizabeth 
N.  Middlebrook  of  Bridgeport;  III.  Eliza  Jane,  b.  April  1,  1836  ;  IV. 
A  son  and  a  dau., b.  May  1,  1840,  d.  in  infancy;  V.  Frederick  James,  b. 
Sept.  30,  1855. 

10.  Augustus,  son  of  James,  (6,)  m.  Frances  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Joseph 
Burton.  She  d.  April  10,  1851,  and  he  m.  Sophia,  dau.  of  Jacob  De 
Groff  of  Poughkeepsie,  N.  Y.,  Jan.  22,  1856.  Ch. :  I.  Charles  Augus- 
tus, b.  Jan.  11,  1845 ;   II.  Francis  Elizabeth,  b.  March  23,  1848. 

11.  James,  son  of  James,  (6,)  m.  Charlotte  E.,  dau.  of  Oliver  Todd, 
of  Plymouth.  Ch.  :  I,  Frances  Augusta,  b.  April  1,  183G,  d.  Jan.  19, 
1837  ;  II.  Sarah  Josephine,  b.  Sept.  30,  1839  ;  III.  Rosa  Elizabeth,  b. 
Nov.  25,  1849. 

BUClvINGHAM. 

1.  Thomas  Buckingham  came  from  England  to  Boston  with  Da- 
venport, Eaton  and  Peter  Prudden,  June  26,  1637.  In  April,  1638,  he 
went  to  New  Haven,  and  thence  to  Milford  in  Nov.  1639.  Hinman 
says  that  he,  Thomas,  was  a  Welchman,  and  that  he  died  in  Boston, 
in  1657,  while  there  on  business.     He.  m.  first,  Hannah,  and  second, 

Ann.     His  children  were,  I.  Hannah,  b.    1632,  in.  Welch;  II. 

Daniel,  b.  1636,  m.  1st,  Sarah  Fowler,  2d,  Mrs.  Alice  Newton.  He 
was  a  sergeant  of  militia,  also  an  elder  of  the  church  at  Milford.  He 
d.  May  2,  1711.  His  cb.  were  Daniel,  Mary,  Thomas,  John,  Gideon, 
Josiah,  and  perhaps  others;  HI.  Samuel,  bap.  June  13,  1641,  m.  Sa- 
rah Baldwin,  Dec.  14,  1663.  (See  paragraph  2,  and  onward,  for  his 
descendants.)  IV.  Mary,  bap.  March  27,  1643 ;  V.  Rev.  Thomas, 
bap.  in  1646.  Where  he  was  educated,  is  not  known.  He  was  at 
Wethersfield  and  Hartford,  as  early  as  1664,  and  continued  some 
time  at  Hartford,  where  he  m.  Esther,  dau.  of  Thomas  Hosmer,  Sept. 
20,  1666.  He  received  a  call  from  Saybrook,  where  he  Avas  or- 
dained in  1670,  and  continued  to  preach  until  his  death,  which  oc- 
curred April  1,  1709.  He  was  a  fellow  of  Yale  College.  He  held  a 
higb  rank  among  the  clergy  of  his  time,  and  the  strict  Puritans  of 
the  Colony,  and  was  one  of  their  leaders. 


480  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBURY. 

2.  Samuel,  son  of  Thomas,  (1,)  m.  Sarah  Baldwin,  Dec.  14,  1663. 
He  resided  at  Milford,  where  he  d.  April  9,  1700.  He  liad  the  fol- 
lowing ch. :  I.  Sarah,  b.  Jan.  8,  1664,  m.  Barnabas  Baldwin;  II.  Mary, 
b.  Oct.  3,  1666,  d.  in  childhood  ;  III.  Samuel,  b.  Oct.  7,  1667,  d. 
Feb.  21,  1668;  IV.  Samuel,  b.  Nov.  1,  1668;  V.  Hannah,  b.  March 

24,  1670-71;   VI.    Tuomas,    b.    June    25,  1672,   m.    Mary ,  d. 

about  1703  ;  VII.  Ann,  b.  June  17,  1674  ;  VIII.  Mary,  b.  March  13, 
1676;  IX.  Hester,  b.  May  4,  1677,  m.  Richard  Piatt. 

3.  Samuel,  son  of  Samuel,    (2,)  m.    Sarah  ,  and  d.    Oct.  29, 

1708.  Cb:  I.  Thomas,  b.  about  1699,  m.  Mary  Woodruff,  Jan.  9, 
1723;  II.  Nathaniel,  b.  about  1701,  m.  Sarah  Smith,  May  30,  1728; 

III.  Mary,  b.  about  1703. 

4.  Thomas,  son  of  Samuel,  (3,)  m.  Mary  Woodruff,  Jan.  9,  1723. 
She  came  to  Westbury,  now  Watertown,  with  her  son  Thomas,  and 
d.  1790.  Their  ch.  were  as  follows:  I.  Mary,  b.  Sept.  16,  1724,  m. 
Gideon  Piatt,  Feb.  28,  1756  ;  II.  Samuel,  b.  Jan.  29,  1725-6,  d. 
July  16,  1726  ;  III.  Thomas,  b.  May  19,  1727,  settled  in  Waterbury ; 

IV.  Epinetus,  bap.  Jan.  10,  1731,  d.  unmarried  ;  V.  Hannah,  bap. 
Aug.  13,  1733,  m.  Abner  Gunn,  of  New  Milford  ;  VI.  Benjamin, 
bap.  Jan.  2,  1736-7,  settled  in  New  Milford  about  1760. 

5.  Thomas,  son  of  Thomas,  (4,)  m.  Sarah  Treat,  removed  in  1772 
from  Milford  to  Waterbury,  the  southwestern  part  of  what  is  now 
called  Watertown,  and  d.  Jan.  27,  1796.  His  widow  Sarah,  d.  Jan. 
11,  1802.  Ch. :  I.  Sarah,  m.  Gamaliel  Clark;  II.  Jean,  m.  Richard 
Bryan;    III.  Isaac,    d.   young;    IV.    Epenetus,  m.  Ann  Welton ;  V. 

Mary,  m.  1st,  Eli  Hickox,  2d, Bradley,  and  d.  Sept.  7,  1837  ;  VI. 

David,  b.  March  14,  1760;  VII.  Dan,  m.  Philena  Garnsey.  Mary 
and  David  remained  in  Watertown  ;  the  others  removed  to  the  State 
of  New  York. 

6.  David,  son  of  Thomas,  (5,)  m.  Chloe,  dau.  of  John  Merril, 
March  14,  1785,  and  d.  Feb.  6,  1832.  She  d.  Dec.  18,  1841.  Ch  : 
I.  John,  b.  Oct.  17,  1786;  II.  Sarah,  b.  Feb.  16,  1790,  m.  William 
H.  Merriman,  son  of  Charles  Merriman,^  of  Watertown  ;  III.  Chloe, 


*  He,  Charles,  was  son  of  Amasa  and  Sarah  Merriman,  of  Wallingford,  and  was  born  Aug. 
2:),  1762.  He  enlisted  into  the  army  of  the  Revolution  as  a  drummer,  in  177G,— became  drum- 
major,  and  served  through  the  war.  He  m.  May  16,  1784,  Anna  Punderson,  of  New  Haven, 
and  settled  in  AVatertown,  where  he  commenced  the  business  of  tailor,  which  he  was  com- 
pelled to  relinquish  in  consequence  of  ill  health  After  having  "  ridden  post  "from  New  Haven 
to  Suffield,  four  years,  and  made  a  voyage  to  the  West  Indies,  he  commenced  the  mercantile 
business  in  Watertown,  in  which  he  continued  until  1S29.  He  had  a  genial  nature,  and  was 
distinguished  for  decision  of  character  and  stern  integrity.  His  death  occurred  Aug.  26, 
1829.    His  wife  survived  him,  and  d.  at  Watertown,  April  1,  1844,  aged  SO.     Their  ch.  were  :  I. 


APPEXDIX.  481 

b.  Dec.  13,  1798,  m.  Thomas  B.  llickox  in  1818,  and  removed  to 
Ohio  in  1837.  Ch :  Mary,  (d.  1852,)  Dauiel,  John  B.  and  Elizabeth. 
IV.  David,  b.  May  28,  1801,  m.  Emeliiie,  dau.  of  Caleb  Hickox,  in 
1823,  who  d.  April  11,  1835.  He  d.  Dec.  18,  1842,  leaving  a  dau. 
Chloe  E.,  b.  Aug.  29,  1827,  who  in.  Moses  S.  Beach  of  N.  Y.,  Sept. 
2,  1845  ;  V.  George,  b.  Oct.  2,  1807,  m.  Betsey,  dau.  of  Levi  Merriam, 
May  13,  1834,  and  removed  to  Ohio.  Ch:  George  E.,  Mary  and  Sarah. 
7.  John,  son  of  David,  (6,)  m.  Betsey,  dau.  of  James  Scovill,Sept. 
10,  1809,  and  resides  in  Waterbury.  His  ch.  are:  I.  Scovill  M.,  b. 
Aug.  10,  1811,  m.  Charlotte  Ann,  dau.  of  Aaron  Benedict,  May  18, 
1835,  and  has  a  son,  John  A.,  b.  April  1,  1839  ;  H.  Mary,  b.  May  17, 
1815,  m.  Abram,  son  of  Doct.  Ambrose  Ives,  Feb.  25,  1839;  has  a 
djiu.  Sarah  C,  b.  March  16,  1840. 

CASTLE. 

1.  Hexry  Castle  emigrated  from  Stratford  to  Woodburv  witli  the 
early  settlers  of  the  last  named  place,  and  d.  in  1098.  His  descend, 
ants  are  somewhat  numerous  at  Woodbury,  Roxbury,  Waterbury  and 
vicinity.  The  First  church  records  of  Woodbury  show  that  he  had  ihe 
following  ch. :  I.  Henry  ;  IL  Samuel ;  III.  Isaac  ;  IV.  Abigail  ;  V.  Mary; 
YI.  Mercy;  all  bap.  at  Woodbury  by  Rev.  Zecheriah  AValker,  Sept. 
1686;  VIL  William,  bap.  1688. 

2.  Henry,  son  of  Henry,  (1,)  was  a  leading  man  in  tliat  part  of 
Woodbnry  (Roxbury  soc.)  where  he  resided.  lie  had  three  sons  and 
three  daughters.     (See  Cothren's  Woodbury,  p.  528.) 

3.  Samuel,  son  of  Henry,  (1,)  m.  and  had  a  dau.  bap.  at  Woodbury 
in  1693. 

4.  Isaac,  son  of  Henry,  (1,)  lived  in  Woodbury,  and  had  :  I.  Isaac, 
bap.  Aug.  9,  1707,  settled  in  Waterbury;  II.  Samuel,  bap.  Aug.  9, 
1707;  in.  Sarah,  bap.  March,  1708;  lY.  Daniel,  bap.  Oct.  I7l7;  Y. 
Israel,  b.  April  18,  1722. 


Charles  P.,  d.  1794  ;  II.  Betsey,  m.  Doct.  Samuel  Elton,  a  well  known  ph}'>ician  of  Watertown. 
She  Is  living,  a?ed  about  TO  ;  III.  William  H.,  b.  Sept.  26,  1T8S.  He  m.  Sarah  Buckingham,  as 
above,  nnd  settled  in  Watertown — was  an  enterprising  merchant — removed  to  Waterbury, 
where  he  now  resides.  Ch  :  Charles  B.,  b.  Oct.  9,  1S39,  m.  Margaret,  dau.  of  Doct.  Edward 
Field,  and  lives  in  "Waterbury;  Sirah  A.,  b.  Sept.  27,  ISIl,  m.  1st,  Thomas  C.  Morton,  and  2d, 
James  M.  L.  Scovill ;  Joseph  P.,  b.  Sept.  24,  181-3,  m.  Julia,  dau.  of  Hawkins  Judd ;  David,  b. 
1S16,  d.  1831 ;  Henry,  b.  March  25,  1820  ;  IV.  Nancy,  b.  1792,  d.  young ;  V.  Nancy,  b.  Oct. 
8,  1798,  m.  Ist,  Eiward  E.  Porter,  2d,  Rev.  Dr.  Holcomb,  Oct.  28,  1827;  VI.  Charles  P.,  b.  Aug. 
7,  1793, — became  a  merchant,  removed  to  Savannah,  Geo.,  and  d.  there,  July  10,  1S35;  VII. 
Anna,  b.  July  7,  1801,  m.  Edward  Hickox,  and  d.  Aug.  19,  1342 ;  VIII.  Frederick,  b.  Aug. 
7,  1303,  also  a  merchant;  removed  to  Georgia,  and  d.  in  Alabama,  Nov.  1,18.36;  IX  William 
Punderson,  b.  Sept.  6,  lSi).5,  also  a  merchant  ;  removed  to  Augusta,  Geo.,  and  d.  Sept.  3,  lSo9  ; 
X.  George  F.,  b.  Aug.  5,  181/8,  m.,  lias  a  family  and  is  living  in  Watertown. 

31 


482  HISTORY    OF    WATERBUET. 

5.  William,  son  of  ITenry,  (1,)  lived  in  Woodbury,  and  his  ch.  were  : 
I.  Ann,  bap.  Jan.  1,  1721 ;  II.  Ruth,  bap.  June  2,  1723;  III.  John,  bap. 
May  29,  1729  ;  IV.  Mercy,  bap.  May,  1727  ;  V.  Setb,  bap.  June,  1729  ; 
VI.  Phineas,  settled  in  Waterbury;  VII.    Tabiatha,  bap.  Oct.   14,  1733. 

6.  Isaac,  son  of  Isaac,  (4,)  settled  in  Waterbury  and  ra.  Tapher,  dau. 
of  John  Warner,  Jan.  21,  1723.  She  d.  July  20,  1740,  and  he  m.  Dec. 
21,  1740,  Lydia,  dau.  of  Richard  Scott  of  "  Sunder  Land."  His  ch. 
were:  I.  Asahel,  b.  Aug.  28,  1725;  II.  Sarah,  b.  Nov.  5,  1727;  HI. 
Mary,  b.  Oct.  25,  I730,m.  Wm.  Judd  in  1752,  and  d.  in  1777  ;  IV.  Lydia, 
b.  Feb.  25,  1735  ;  V.  Abisha,  b.  Jan.  26,  1738  ;  VL  Tapher,  b.  Oct.  3, 
1741 ;  VIL  Elizabeth,  b.  April  20,  1743  ;  VIIL  Isaac,  b.  Feb.  5, 1745,  d. 
1760;  IX.  Mehitable,  b.  Sept.  5,  1747  ;  X.  Richard,  b.  Dec.  5,  1749  ; 
XL  Daniel,  b.  Feb.  16,  1752;  XIL  Amasa,  b.  April  6,  1755;  XIIL 
Jedediah,  b.  July  2,  1757. 

7.  Capt.  Phineas,  son  of  William,  (5,)  was  b.  at  Woodbury,  March 
25,  1731,  and  bap.  May  2,  1731.  He  m.  Mary  Dickerman  of  Ham- 
den,  who  was  b.  Sept.  2,  1743.  He  settled  in  Waterbury,  was  captain 
in  the  French  and  Indian  war,  and  also  served  in  tlie  Revolution.  He 
d.  Sept.  25,  1815,  and  his  wid.  Mary,  d.  Dec.  20,  1817.  Co.:  L  Mehit- 
able, b.  Jan.  24,  1768,  ra.  Ashbel  Upson  and  settled  inAVolcott;  II. 
Mary,  b.  Feb.  24,  1770,  m.  Woodward  Hotchkiss  and  settled  in  Pros- 
pect, (see  Hotchkiss  family ;)  IIL  Tabiatha,  b.  March  19,  1772,  m. 

Barrett,  settled  in  Berlin,  lost  her  husband  and  m.  Frederick  Hotchkiss 
of  Prospect  and  d.  in  1850;  IV.  Rhoda,  b.  April  3,1774,  ra.  Eber 
Smith  of  Burlington,  and  d.  Sept.  1,  1805;  V.  Phineas,  b.  April  25, 
1776,  m.  Olivia  Deane  and  settled  in  Camden,  N.  Y.  ;  YL  Esther,  b. 
April  24,  1778,  m.  James  Alcott  and  settled  in  Wolcott ;  VIL  Seth,  b. 
June  12,  1780,  m.  Olive  Stephens,  settled  in  Salina,  N.  Y. ;  VIIL 
Chloe,  b.  June  3d,  1782,  d.  1807  ;  IX.  Samuel  D.,  b.  Nov.  3,  1784,  m. 
Sarah   Brockett,  removed  to  Camden,  N,  Y. ;   X.   Sally,  b.   Aug.    15, 

1788,  m. Thompson,  and  soon  after  died.       All  of  this  f;imily  left 

or  have  children,  except  Chloe,  and  most  of  them  large  families.  Many 
of  them  lived  to  great  age. 

8.  Asahel,  son  of  Isaac,  (6,)  m.  Deborah,  dau.  of  Gideon  Allen, 
May  22, 1745,  and  had  :  L  Tapher,  b.  Feb.  24,  1746  ;  IL  Levi,  b.  Oct. 
23,  1747  ;  IIL  Joel,  b.  Dec.  30,  1751 ;  IV.  Simeon,  b.  May  IS,  1753  ; 
V.  John,  b.  April  24,  1755. 

9.  Abisha,  son  of  Isaac,  (6,)  ra,  Miriara,  dau.  of  Ebenezer  Bradley, 
March  14,  1760.  Ch. :  I.  Bradley,  b.  Dec.  5,  1761,  d.  1777  ;  IL  Asher, 
b.  May  10,  1763 ;  IIL  Sarah,  b.  April  29,  1765  ;  IV.  Philo,  b.  Feb.  16, 


appp:ndix.  483 

1768  ;  V.  Molly,  b.  July  16,  lYTO  ;  YI.  Rosanna,  b.  July  17,   1775; 
VII.  Samuel,  b.  April  24,  1777. 

CLARK. 

1.  Thomas,*  son  of  William,  of  Northampton,  Mass.,  and  Lebanon, 
Conn.,  m,  Sarah,  dau.  of  John  Strong-  of  Windsor,  June  27,  I7l7,  and 
settled  in  Waterbury.  Sarah,  his  wife,  d.  Sept.  10,  1749,  aged  about 
53,  and  he  m.  2d,  Mary,  wid.  of  Benjamin  Harrison,  July  30,  1760,  and 
d.  Nov.  12,  1764.  His  ch.  were,  L  Mary,  b.  Oct.  31,  1718,  m.  Ben- 
jamin Harrison,  Jr.;  II.  Timothy,  b.  March  22,  1720-1,  d.  Nov.  22, 
1727;  IIL  Sarah,  b.  Dec.  13,  1723,  ra.  Stephen  Upson;  IV.  Han- 
nah, b.  Jan.  31,  1726-7  ;  V.  Hepzibah,  b.  Oct.  17,  1729,  m.  Joseph  Hop- 
kins;  VL  Timothy,  b.  May  19,  1732  ;  VIL  Esther,  b.  June  22,  1735, 
m.  Phineas  Porter  ;  VIII.  Thomas,  b.  Jan.  26,  1737-8;  IX.  David,  b. 
April  25,  1740. 

2.  Timothy,  son  of  Thomas,  (1,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Dec.  4,  1756.  She  d.  Oct.  21,  1757,  and  he  m.  2d,  Hannah,  dau.  of 
Isaac  Bronson,  June  13,  1759.  She  d.  Sept.  15,  1783,  and  he  m.  3d, 
Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Thomas  Porter.  He  d.  Sept.  18,  1824.  Ch.  :  L 
Sarah,  b.  Oct.  9,  1757,  d.  May  6, 1770;  IL  Asahel,  b.  July  10,  1760, 
d.  Dec.  16,  1787;  IIL  William,  b.  June  11,  1763,  m.  Sarah  Carring- 
ton  of  New  Haven,  April  14,  1785;  IV.  Eli,  b.  Oct.  2,  1764;  V. 
Molly,  b.  Oct.  10,  1766,  d.  Sept.  14,  1856. 

3.  Thomas,  son  of  Thomas,  (1,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Daniel  Hine  of  New 
Milford,  March  20, 1765.  Ch. :  I.  Daniel,  b.  Dec.  30, 1765,  d.  in  infancy; 
IL  "  Rusha,"  b.  July  13,  1767,  d.  March  7,  1813  ;  IIL  Sarah,  b.  June  5, 
1770,  m.  Lemuel  Harrison;  IV.  L^aniel,  b.  April  19,  1772;  V.  Aure- 
lia,  b.  Feb.  8,  1779,  (the  family  record  says  1780,)  now  living,  unm., 
1857. 

4.  David,  son  of  Thomas,  (1,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Samuel  Nichols 
of  Lebanon,  Oct.  27,  1772.  He  had  one  child,  Hannah,  b.  June  5, 
1774,  and  m.  Reuben  Adams. 

5.  Eli,  son  of  Timothy,  (2,)  m.  Rebecca,  dau.  of  Aaron  Benedict, 
Dec.  20,  1792,  and  d.  bee.  20,  1843.  Ch. :  L  Joseph,  b.  Nov.  3, 
1793,  d.  Sept.  7,  1816 ;  IL  Polly,  b.  July  31,  1796,  m.  Merlin  Mead  of 
South  Salem,  N.  Y.,  Nov.  10,  1820;  IIL  Maria,  b.  March  12,  1799,  m. 
1st,  Solomon  Smith  of  N.  Y.,  May  13,  1820,  who  d.  April  10,  1822, 
and  she  m.  2d,  John  T.   Baldwin,  of  New  Milford,  Oct.  27,  1831  ;  IV. 

*  See  p.  143  of  this  work. 


48-i  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 

Harriet,  b.  Nov.  30,  1802,  ra.  Edward  Seovill,  Aug.  21,  1823;  V.  Ed- 
ward, b.  June  4,  1805,  m.  Caroline  Smith,  and  2d,  Maria  Stone;  VI. 
Eli  Benedict,  b.  Feb.  22,  1808,  m,  Cornelia  DeWett ;  VII.  Charles,  b. 
Nov.  20,  1810,  m.  Harriet  Blakeslee,  and  settled  at  Cayahoga  Falls, 
Ohio;  VIII.  Mary  Ann,  b.  July  30,  1813;  IX.  Timothy  B.,  b.  Nov.  10, 
1815,  m.  Elvira  Calkin  and  removed  to  Iowa;  X.  James,  b.  Sept.  18, 
1818,  m.  Sarah  Maria  Silliman,  and  settled  at  Iowa  Cit}',  Iowa. 

6.  Daniel,  son  of  Thomas,  (3,)  m.  Polly,  dau.  of  Isaac  Lewis,  Feb.  10, 
1793.  She  d.  and  he  m.  Polly  Hitchcock.  Ch. :  I.  Thomas,  b.  March 
11,  1794;  II.  Isaac  Lewis,  b.  June  25,  179G;  III.  Nancy,  b.  Sept. 
19,  1799. 

Other  families  of  the  name  of  Clark  have  resided  in  "Waterbury, 
The  following  are  some  of  them. 

Joseph  Clark's  will  was  proved  Feb.  2,  17G2,  by  which  it  appears  be 
had   ch.,  as  follows:  I.  Joseph,   d.  Jan.   15,   1749-50;  11.  Lydia,   rn. 

Wheeler;  III.  Hannah,  m. Plum  ;  IV^.  Tabiatha,  m. Al- 

lyn ;  V.  Deborah,  m. Sanford   of  New  Haven  ;  VI.  Diana,  m. 

Curtiss ;  VH.  Lucy,  m.  Benjamin  Matthews. 

Joseph,  son  of  Joseph  above,  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Abraham  Clark,  of 
Southing-ton,  Dec.  8,  1741,  and  d.  Jan.  15,  1749-50.  Ch. :  I.  Mary, 
b.  Oct.  3,  1743;  11.  Abner,  b.  May  12,  1745  ;  IIL  Ruth,  b.  Aug.  28, 
1747  ;  IV.  Lydia,  b.  Oct.  5,  1749. 

JoHX  Clakk,  son  of  Joseph,  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Stephen  Brooks 
of  Farmington,  Sept.  9,  1747.  Ch. :  L  John,  b.  May  11,  1748.  Samuel 
Clark,  the  son  of  Joseph,  d.  Qe\)t.  28,  1749. 

Caleb  Clark,  of  Waterbury,  d.  July  29,  1768.  He  had  a  son, 
Daniel,  who  m.  April  12,  1759,  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  John  Dowd,  of  Mid- 
dletown.  Ch. :  L  Daniel,  b.  April  12,  1760,  d.  next  day  ;  II.  Phebe, 
b.  Dec.  6,  1762  ;  IIL  Truman,  b.  Nov.  12,  1764. 

John  Clark  was  born  at  Milford,  about  1765.  He  settled  in  Water- 
bury  and  ra.  Mille,  dau.  of  Herman  Munson,  also   of  Waterbury,  April 

9,  1788.  After  the  birth  of  his  children,  he  removed  to  New  Milford, 
and  thence,  in  1818,  to  Medina,  Ohio.  He  d.  in  1829.  His  wid.  was 
living  in  Ohio.  1855,  aged  85.  Ch. :  L  Sherman,  b.  Aug.  29,  1789  ;  II. 
Polly,  b.  Nov.  19,  1791  ;  IIL  bansom,  b.  April  8,  1794;  IV.  Bela 
Bronson,  b.  Oct.  1,  1796  ;  V.  John  Lines,  b.  Aug.  8,  1799 ;  VL  Amos, 
b.  Dec.  3,  1801  ;  VII.  Jeremiah,  b.  Jan.  4,  1804 ;  VIII.  Anson,  b.  Dec. 

10,  1806,  graduated  at  Kenyon  college,  Ohio,  became  an  Episcopal 
clergyman,  has  held,  successively,  the  rectorship  of  the  parishes  of  St. 
Andrew's,  Eiyria,  St.  Paul's,  Norwalk,  St.  Philip's,  Circleville,  and  St. 
Timothy's,  Massillon,  all  in  Ohio.     In  1854,  he  accepted  the  rectorship 


APPENDIX.  485 

of  Emmanuel  cliurdi,  in  tlie  city  of  Roekford,  Illinois,  wLere  he  now 
lives;  IX.  Abel,  h.  July  12,  1812. 

COOK.* 

1.  Henry  Cook  was  at  Plymoutli,  Mass.,  before  1640.  lie  had  sons, 
Isaac,  John,  Henry  and  Samuel.  Isaac  is  supposed  to  have  remained 
at  Plymouth,  and  John  to  have  settled  at  Middletown.  Henry  and. 
Samuel  settled  at  Wal ling-ford,  and  are  the  ancestors  of  most  of  the 
name  of  Cook  in  Connecticut,  and  of  many  in  various  parts  of  the 
country. 

2.  Samuel,  son  of  Henry,  (1,)  was  among  the  first  settlers  of  Wal- 
ling-ford,  and  signed  the  fundamental  articles  of  that  town  in  1670. 
He  m.  1st,  Hope,  dau.  of  Edward  Pai'ker  of  New  Haven,  May  2,  1667, 
2d,  Mary  Roberts,  July  14,  1690.  lied,  in  March,  1702,  aged  61.  He 
had  a  son,  Samuel,  b.  March  3,  1668. 

3.  Hknry,  son  of  Henry,  (1,)  was  early  at  "Wallingford.  He  had  a 
son,  Henry,  who  settled  in  Waterbury. 

4.  Samuel,  son  of  Samuel,  (2,)  m.  1st,  Hannah  Merriman,  about 
1690,  who  d.  May,  1713,  and  2d,  Elizabeth  Bedell  of  Stratford,  and  d. 
Sept.  1725.  He  had  five  sons  and  nine  daus.  One  of  his  sous,  Moses^ 
settled  in  Waterbury. 

5.  Henry,  son  of  Henry,  (3,)  was  admitted  an  inhabitant  of  Water- 
bury in  1728.  Ch. :  Ebenezer,  Samuel,  Henry,  Thankful  and  Jon- 
athan. 

6.  Moses,  eldest  son  of  Samuel,  (4,)  was   b.  in  Wallingford,  Nov.  6, 

1716.     He  m.  Sarah ,  and  settled  in  Branford,  where  three   of  his 

children  were  born.  He  removed  thence  to  Waterbui-y,  where  his  wife 
died  in  Jan.  1760,  and  he  m.  Dinah,  wid.  of  Benjamin  Harrison,  who 
d.  in  Oct.  1792.  He  was  struck  on  the  head  with  a  "flat-iron  "  by  an 
Indian,  who  mistook  him  for  another  person,  and  d.  Dec.  12,  1771,  (see 
p.  368.)  Ch. :  I.  Charles,  b.  1741,  d.  Aug.  11, 1764  ;  II.  Moses,  b.  May 
30,  1744  ;  HI.  Sarah,  b.  June  13,  1747,  d.  April  5,  1823,  unm. ;  IV. 
Esther,  b.  1750,  m.  Joseph  Beebe ;  V.  Elizabeth,  b.  May  15,  1752,  m. 
Benjamin  Baldwin;  VI.  Hannah,  b.  Jan.  11,  1755,  m.  Titus  Bronson  ; 
VII.  Lydia,  b.  May  27,  1765,  m. Hickox. 

7.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Henry,  (5,)  settled  in  Northbury,  and  m.  Phebe, 
dau.  of  Moses  Blakeslee,  May  10,  1744.     Ch.  :   I.   Huldah,  b.  April  26, 

*  The  ancestors  from  whom  most  of  tlie  Cooks  in  New  England  trace  their  descent,  came 
from  Ilereford-shire  and  Kent,  in  England.  The  ancestral  branch  from  whom  those  of  the 
name  trace  their  origin,  now  resident  in  various  parts  of  this  State,  came  from  Kent,  and  were 
of  the  Puritan  stock. 


486  IIISTOEY    OF   AVATERBUEY. 

1745  ;  IL  Joel,  b.  Aug.  5,  174G  ;  III.  Justus,  b.  May  25,  1748,  grad. 
Yale  Coll. ;  IV.  Jonah,  b.  Aug.  11,  1750;  V.  Eri,  b.  Oct.  20,  1752; 
VI.  Rozell,  b.  May  1,  1755,  grad.  Yale  Coll.;  VII.  Nise,  b.  April  17, 
1758  ;  VIII.  Arbe,b.  April  4, 17G0  ;  IX.  Lurenda,  b.  Sept.  20,  17G4  ;  X. 
Uri  ;  XL  Ebenezer,  became  a  clergyman  and  resided  at  Montville, 
Conn. 

8.  Henry,  son  of  Henry,  (5,)  ra.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Nathan  Benham 
of  Wallingford,  Nov.  7, 1745,  and  settled  in  Northbury.  Ch. :  I.  Thank- 
ful, b.  Jan.  12,  1747;  II.  Mary,  b.  Marcb  30,  1748,  d.  June  11,  1760; 
HI.  Sarah,  b.  March,  1750,  d.  June  15,  1760;  IV.  Zuba,  b.  Dec.  24, 
1751,  d.  June  17,  1760  ;  V.  Lemuel,  b.  Dec.  7, 1754,  d.  June  24,  1760  ; 
VL  Selah,  b.  Dec.  19,  1756  ;  VIL  Trueworthy,  b.  Sept.  29,  1759. 

9.  Jonathan,  son  of  Henry,  (5,)  m.  Ruth,  dau.  of  William  Luttington 
of  North  Haven,  June  15,  1735,  and  settled  in  Northbury.  Ch. ;  Jon- 
athan, b.  March  29,  1736  ;  II.  Jesse,  b.  Feb.  1,  1739  ;  HI.  Titus,  b.  May 
2,  1741  ;  IV.  Sarali,  b.  Oct.  31,  1744  ;  V.  Abel,  b.  May  18,  1747. 

10.  Moses,  son  of  Moses,  (6,)  m.  Jemima,  dau.  of  Joseph  Upson, 
Nov.  4,  1766.  She  d.  March  6,  1821 ;  he  d.  Dec.  28, 1831.  Ch. :  L  Jo- 
seph, b.  Nov.  4,  1767  ;  II.  Lucy,  b.  Sept.  29,  1769,  d.  Dec.  8,  1835, 
iinra. ;  HI.  Daniel,  b.  Jan.  5,  1773  ;  IV.  Hannah,  b.  March  5,  1775,  m. 
Horatio  Upson ;  V.Anna,  b.  March  8,  1778,  m.  Mark  Leavenworth; 
VL  Elias,  b.  Dec.  26,  1783,  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Daniel  Bartholomew  of 
Plymouth,  Nov.  16,  1813.  She  d.  and  he  m,  2d,  a  Mrs.  Bartholomew, 
and  d.  March  14,  1847. 

11.  Joel,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (7,)  ra.  Dinah  Dunbar,  Nov.  17,  1768. 
He  lived  in  Northbury.  Ch. :  L  Levi,  b.  Sept.  17,  1769,  d.  nnm.;  II. 
Chloe,  b.  June  25, 1771,  m. Emblem  Barnes;  III.  Zenas,  b.  July  7,  1773  ;' 

IV.  Dinah,  b.  March  26,   1775,  m. Jerome;  V.  Iluldah,  b.  Dec. 

29,  1777,  m.  Truman  Johnson;  VI.  Uri,  b.  Dec.  24,  1779  ;  VIL  Lucy, 
m.  John  Elden  ;  VIII.  Sally,  d.  in  early  life  ;  IX.  Phebe,  m.  Joel  Griggs  ; 
X.  Joel,  m.  Polly  Russell  in  Bradford  Co.,  Pa. 

12.  Joseph,  son  of  Moses,  (10,)  m.  Anna,  dau.  of  Ezra  Bronson, 
Esq.,  Aug.  1792.  He  d.  Nov.  26,  1855  ;  his  wife  ten  hours  afterwards. 
Both  were  buried  in  one  grave.  Ch. :  I.  Edward  Bronson,  b.  Marcb 
18,  1793  ;  IL  Samuel,  b.  Dec.  12,  1794;  IIL  Su-san  Judd,  b.  Oct.  25, 
1797,  m.  Mark  Leavenworth,  Nov.  1844,  and  d.  Dec.  16,  1848  ;  IV. 
Sally  Leavenworth,  b.  Oct.  29,  1799,  m.  Solomon  Curtiss  of  South- 
ington;  V.  Nancj^  b.  Nov.  16,  1801,  m.  William  Scovill  of  Middle- 
town,  in  1828  ;  VL  Nathan,  b.  Jan.  8,  1804  ;  VIL  George,  b.  April  8, 
1806,  d.  Jan.  19,  1815  ;  VIII.  George  William,  b.  Feb.  28,  1811. 

13.  David,  son  of  Mo^es,  (10,)  m.  Nov.  25,  1799,  Sally,  dau.  of  Jacob 


APPENDIX.  487 

Sperry  of  Cheshire.  Ch. :  I.  Marcus,  b.  Sept.  12,  1800,  d.  Feb.  9, 
1821  ;  II.  Sarab  P.,  b.  Aug.  1804,  m.  Thos.  B.  Segur,  in  1826;  III. 
Moses  Stiles,  b.  1812,  m.  Polly  S.  Tolles  in  1844. 

14.  Zenas,  son  of  Joel,  (11,)  m.  1st,  Polly  Lewis  of  Plymouth,  Feb. 
1800,  whod.  in  June,  1809,  and  he  m.  2d,  Betsey,  dau.  of  Col.  Phiueas 
Porter,  May  20,  1810.  He  d.  in  Waterbury,  April  25,  1851.  She  d. 
Oct.  185  V.  Ch.  :  I.  William,  b.  April  17,  1802,  m.  Marilla  Plumb,  and 
removed  to  Michigan;  II.  Sarah  Curtiss,  b.  Jan.  16,  1807;  III.  Geo. 
Lewis,  b.  June  5,  1809,  now  deceased;  IV.  Lucian  Porter,  b.  March 
18,  1811,  m.  Sarah  Judd,  and  removed  to  Georgia;  V.  Harriet  M.,  b. 
Dec.  9,  1812,  ra.  Henry  P.  Peck  of  Berlin  ;  VI.  Catharine  L.,  b.  July 
2,  1815,  in.  Augustus  Smith  of  Plymouth,  and  removed  to  New  Haven  ; 
VII.  Mary  E.,  b.  March  27,  1818. 

15.  Edward  Bronson,  son  of  Joseph,  (12,)  m.  Sept.  11,  1831,  Dolly, 
dau.  of  Charles  McClallan  of  Lancaster,  Mass.,  and  has  a  dau.  Susan  L., 
b.  Aug.  1,  1833.  He  established  the  "Waterbury  American,"  a  well 
managed,  weekly  newspaper,  in  1845-6. 

16.  Samuel,  son  of  Joseph,  (12,)  ra.  Charity  Warner,  Nov.  7,  1813, 
and  d.  in  1835.  His  wid.  ra.  Leveret  Candee  of  Watertown.  An 
only  dau.  Ann  Maria,  b.  Sept.  8,  1815,  ra.  Leveret  E.  Rice,  Dec. 
G,  1832. 

17.  Nathan,  son  of  Joseph,  (12,)  m.  Clarissa,  dau.  of  Russell  Rey- 
nolds of  Plymouth,  May  31,  1826,  and  has  one  son,  Walter  Hart,  b. 
Sept.  26,  1837. 

IS.  George  William,  son  of  Joseph,  (12,)  grad.  Yale  Coll.  in  1837, 
and  m.  Sept.  26,  the  same  year,  Emily  C,  dau.  of  Tho.  Johnson  of  Mid- 
dletown.  Ch.:  I.  Gertrude  E.  H.,  b.  Oct.  29,  1838  ;  IL  Francis  B.,  b. 
Sept.  14,  1840,  d.  June  29,  1841  ;  III.  Ella  S.,  b.  Oct.  7,  1842. 

DE  FOREST. 

1.  Three  brothers,  Hendrick,  Isaac  and  David  De  Forest,  (or  De  la 
Forest,)  came  to  this  country  in  the  early  part  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury. Hendrick  and  Isaac  settled  in  New  York.  Hendrick  soon  died, 
and  it  is  believed  without  children.  The  descendants  of  Isaac  are  nu- 
merous. One  or  more  of  his  children  settled  in  or  near  Albany,  and  in- 
termarried with  the  Dutch ;  hence  the  name  became  corrupted,  and 
many  of  his  descendants  are  called  De  Frees,  De  Frieze  or  De  Frest. 
David  settled  in  Stratford,  Conn.  The  following  are  his  descendants  in 
the  male  line. 

2.  David,  above,  who  settled  in  Stratford,  d.  in  1721,  left  si.K 
sons,  as  follows:  David,  b.   1702;  Samuel,  b.   1704;    Isaac,   b.   170(3, 


488  niSTORT  OF  wateebijry. 

d.  without  descendants  in   the  male  line  ;  Edward,  b.  1708;  Henry,  b, 
17 10;  Benjamin,  b.  1716. 

3.  David,  son  of  David,  (2,)  bad  sons  :  Samuel,  no  male  issue  ;  David, 
Hezekiab,  Elibu,  Ephraim. 

4.  Samuel,  son  of  David,  (2,)  bad  sons:  Joseph,  b.  1731;  Samuel, 
b.  1739,  no  male  issue;  Nehemiah,  b.  1743  ;  David,  b.  1745;  Josiah, 
b.  174S. 

5.  Edavard,  son  of  David,  (2,)  had,  Isaac,  b.  1736;  Elibba,  b.  1738  ; 
Edward,  b.  1743;  John,  b.  1,745;  AVilliam,  b.  1752,  no  male  i.ssue  ; 
Joseph,  b.  1758. 

6.  Hexry,  son  of  David,  (2,)  had,  Henry,  b.  1750;  Timothy,  b. 
1751  ;  David,  b.  1755.     Neither  of  them  had  sons. 

7.  Benjamin,  son  of  David,  (2,)  had  Hezekiab,  b.  1745;  Xehemiah, 
b.  1748,  no  issue;  Benjamin,  b.  1749;  Isaac,  b.  1758;  Oihniel,  b. 
1761. 

8.  David,  son  of  David,  (3,)  had,  Eliud,  b.  1769;  Samuel;  David, 
no  male  issue  ;  Isaac;  Clark,  b.  1772. 

9.  Hezekiah,  son  of  David,  (3,)  had  Uriah,  no  male  issue  ;  Hezekiab, 
b.  1770 

10.  Elihu,  son  of  David,  (3,)  had,  Joseph,  no  male  issue  ;  David  L., 
b.  1763  ;  Benjamin,  no  male  issue  ;  Bill  Clark,  no  male  issue. 

11.  Ephraim,  son  of  David,  (3,)  had,  Nathan,  b.  1765;  Zalmon, 
b.  1770  ;  Henry,  b.  1778  ;  Samuel,  b.  1784,  no  sons  ;  Ephraim  B.,  b. 
1787. 

12.  Joseph,  son  of  Samuel,  (4,)  had,  Samuel;  Abel,  b.  1761  ;  Mills, 
b.  1763,  no  male  issue;  Elihu,  b.  1777;  Gideon. 

13.  Nehemiah,  son  of  Samuel,  (4,)  had,  William,  b.  1773;  Lock- 
wood,  b,  1775  ;  Philo,  b.  1779  ;  Delauzun  and  Charles. 

14.  David,  son  of  Samuel,  (4,)  had,  Isaac  N. ;  David  L.  ;  Samuel  ; 
Joseph.     The  first  three  had  no  sons. 

15.  Isaac,  son  of  Edward,  (5,)  had  Benjamin. 

16.  Elisha,  son  of  Edward,  (5,)  liad,  Isaac,  b.  1768,  no  male  issue; 
Daniel,  b.  1771,  had  Albert,  who  d.  without  male  issue. 

17.  Edward,  son  of  Edward,  (5,)  had  James,  no  male  issue, 

18.  John,  son  of  Edward,  (5,)  had,  Curtis;  Philo,  b.  1772  ;  John  ; 
Edward ;  the  two  last  no  male  issue  ;  James  had  a  son  James. 

19.  Joseph,  son  of  Edward,  (5,)  had,  I.  William,  b.  1787,  had  sons, 
Charles  P.  and  George  ;  11.  Joseph,  b.  1790,  had  W^illiam,  Curtis  W  , 
Ransford  S.,  John  D.,  and  Daniel  A.;  III.  Mitchell,  b.  1797,  had  sons, 
Daniel  and  William;  IV.  Curtis,  b.  1803,  had  William,  Darwin  and 
Charles. 


APPENDIX.  4S9 

20.  Hezekiaii,  son  of  Benjamiu,  (7,)  had,  Philo,  b.  17S2,  and  Samuel 
A.,  b.  1784. 

21.  Benjamin',  son  of  Benjamin,  (7,)  had,  David  C,  b.  1774;  John 
IL,  b.  1776;  Benjamin,  b.  17S0  ;  Ezra,  b.  1782. 

22.  Isaac,  son  of  Benjamin,  (7.)  had,  Alonzo,  b.  3  788?  Lemuel,  b. 
1788;  Aaron,  b.  1790;  Isaac,  b.  1794;  Grandison,  b.  1797.  None 
but  the  first  had  male  issue. 

23.  Othniel,  son  of  Benjamin,  (7,)  had,  Linson  ;  Sidney,  no  male 
issue ;  Charles. 

24.  Eliud,  son  of  David,  (8,)  had,  I.  Iliram,  b.  1793,  had  ^Yilliam  J. ; 

II.  Charles,  b.  1796,  had  Harvey  B. ;  III.  William,  no  sons;  IV.  Samuel, 
b.  1800,  no  sons  ;_V.  David  L.,  b.  1804,  had  John  E.  and  Cyrus  R. ;  YI. 
Edward,  b.  1806,  had  Charles  E.  and  Samuel  E. 

25.  Samuel,  son  of  David,  (8,)  had,  William,  no  male  issue  ;  Ileury, 
do.;  Ira. 

20.  Isaac,  son  of  David,  (8,)  had,  I.  David,  who  had  Legrand  and 
David  L. ;  II.  Harvey,  had  George  and  Alanson  B. ;  III.  Lewis,  no 
male  issue;  IV.  Isaac  J.,  had  Josiah  and  Samuel  J. 

27.  Clark,  son  of  David,  (8,)  had,  L  Curtis,  b.  1804,  who  had  Sam- 
uel C,  Ransille  B.  and  William  W.;  H.  Jared,  b.  1807,  had  \Yilliam 
U.  and  Giles  A.;  IIL  William  C,  b.  1811,  had  John  W.,  Henry  W., 
Daniel  W.  and  Isaac;  IV.  George,  b.  1812,  had  Sylvester,  Charles  11. 
and  James. 

28.  Hezekiah,  son  of  Hezetiah,  (9,)  had,  I.  Hiram  O.,  b.  1794  ;  II. 
Legrand,  b.  1802,  who  had   George  B.,  Charles  E.  and  Stephen  C. 

29.  David  L.,  son  of  Elihu,  (10,)  had,  I.  Archibald,  b.  1787,  no 
male  issue;  II.  Alfred,  b.  1791,  do.;  HI.  Benjamin,  had  David  L.,  Ben- 
jamin and  Alfred  A. 

30.  Xatiian,  son  of  Epliraim,  (11,)  had,  I.  Henry,  b.  1790,  who  had 
Edward,  James,  Iliram  and  John  ;  II.  Samuel  J.,  b.  1793,  had  George  S. ; 

III.  Silas  G.,  b.  1794,  had  Gilbert;  IV.  J.  Iloyt,  b.  1806,  had  George  ; 
V.  Charles,  b.  1808,  had  George  and  Charles. 

31.  Zalmon,  son  of  Ephraim,  (11,)  had,  I.  John  AV.,  no  male  issue; 
II.  William  S.,  b.  1815,  had  James  H. 

32.  Hexry,  son  of  Ephraim,  (11,)  had  Henry  E.,  b.  1818. 

33.  Ephraim  B.,  son  of  Ephraim,  (11,)  had,  L  William  S.,  b.  1812, 
who  had  Albert;  IL  Samuel  H.,  b.  1827;  IIL  David  C.,b.  1822,  had 
Charles  II. 

34.  Samuel,  son  of  Joseph,  (12,)  had,  I.  Marcus,  no  male  issue  ;  II. 
Legrand,  do. ;  III.  William  C,  had  Joseph  and  Samuel. 

35.  Abel,  son  of  Joseph,  (12,)  had,  I.  Henry,  who  had  William  H. 


490  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKT. 

and  Charles  ;  IL  Mills,  no   male   issue  ;  III.  William ;  IV.  M.  Delau- 
zun,  had  Samuel  M. 

36.  Gideon,  son  of  Joseph,  (12,)  had,  I.  Lee,  who  had  George  and 
Henry  S.;  II.  Abel  B. ;  III.  Cyrus  H.,  had  Charles,  Heraan  and 
James  ;  IV.  Charles  A.,  had  Charles  A.,  A.  Henry,  Dewitt  C.  and  Ed- 
ward ;  V.  Tracy  R.,  had  Cyrus  H.,  Lewis  G.,  Charles  L.  and  Albert  W. 

37.  William,  son  of  Nehemiah,  (13,)  had,  I.  Isaac,  who  had  Thomas 
and  William ;  IL  Lockwood  M. ;  IIL  William,  bad  Edward ;  IV. 
Marcus. 

38.  Lockwood,  son  of  Nehemiah,  (13,)  had,  I.  W.  Wheeler,  b.  1794  ; 
IL  George  B.,  b.  1806,  and  had  Benjamin  L.  and  George  B.  ;  III. 
Henry  G.,  b.  1820,  had  Eobert  W.  and  Lockwood  ;  IV.  James  G.,  b. 
1822  ;  V.  Frederick  L.,  b.  1825. 

39.  Philo,  son  of  Nehemiah,  (13,)  had  Delauzun,  b.  1808,  who  had 
George  and  William. 

40.  Delauzun,  son  of  Nehemiah,  (13,)  had  William  B.,  b.  1811,  who 
had  William  A. 

41.  Joseph,  son  of  David,  (14,)  had,  I.  Isaac  N.,  b.  1809,  who  had 
Moulton,  Newton,  Henry  C, Theodore,  Joseph  and  Charles;  II.  John  J,, 
b.  1811  ;  in.  James  G.,  b.  1817,  and  had  John  and  Frank. 

42.  Benjamin,  son  of  Isaac,  (15,)  had,  I.  Isaac,  b.  1791,  who  had 
Benjamin,  Andrew  and  David  ;   II.  David  b,  1801,  had  David. 

43.  PuiLO,  son  of  John,  (18,)  lived  in  Woodbury,  had,  I.  Marcus,  b. 
1794,  who  had  John  P.,  George  and  Marcus  ;  IL  George,  b.  1804. 

44.  PiiiLO,  son  of  Hezekiah,  (20,)  had,  I.  Charles,  who  had  Charles; 
II.  David  D.,  had  George  H.  and  Frederick  C. ;  IIL  John  ;  IV.  Wil- 
liam, had  Edward  ;  V.  George. 

45.  Samuel  A.,  son  of  Hezekiah,  (20,)  had,  I.  Charles,  who  liad  Wil- 
liam L.  and  Francis  E. ;  II.  Spencer  H. 

46.  David  C,  son  of  Benjamin,  (21,)  and  founder  of  the  "  De  Forest 
Fund"  of  Yale  College,  had  a  son,  Carlos  M.,  b.  1813. 

47.  John  H.,  son  of  Benjamin,  (21,)  had,  I.  George  S.,  b.  1812,  who 
had  Henry  W. ;  IL  Henry  A.,  b.  1814  ;  IIL  Andrew  W.,  b.  1817,  had 
Edward  L.  and  Charles  S. ;  IV.  John  W. 

48.  Benjamin,  son  of  Benjamin,  (21,)  had,  I.  John,  b.  1806,  who  had 
Erastus  L. ;  II.  Samuel  S.,  b.  1811  ;  IIL  Benjamin. 

49.  Ezra,  son  of  Benjamin,  (21,)  had,  L  David  W.,  b.  1809;  IL 
Benjamin  C,  b.  1814,  who  had  David  W.,  Benjamin  D.  and  Ezra. 

50.  Alonzo,  son  of  Isaac,  (22,)  had,  L  Benjamin  S.,  b.  1806  ; 
II.  Ezekiel  M.,  b.  1808;  III.  Samuel  S.,  b.  1811,  had  Frank  B. ;  IV. 
Aaron  G.,  b.  1814. 


APPENDIX.  401 

51.  LiNsox,  son  of  Othniel,  (23,)  bad,  I.  Cliarles  U.,  b.  1821  ;  11. 
Linson,  b.  1822,  had  William  H. 

52.  Charles,  son  of  Otbuiel,  (23,)  bad,  I.  Cbarles  B.^  b.  1819,  wbo 
bad  Cbarles  E.,  Clarence  R.,  Benjamin  and  William  11. ;  II.  Benjamin, 
b.  1821  ;  III.  Alfred,  b.  1822;  IV.  Otbniel,  b.  1826;  V.  David,  b. 
1828;  VI.  Tbomas  B.,  b.  1832;  VII.  William  H.,  b.  1837;  VIII. 
Linson,  b.  1839. 

GUERNSEY,  ou  GARNSEY. 

1.  Tradition  says  that  John  Guernsey  emigrated  from  the  Isle  of 
Guernsey,  near  England,  and  settled  at  Milford,  Conn.,  and  that  he  is 
the  progenitor  of  the  following  fomily. 

2.  Joseph,  said  to  be  the  son  of  John,  (1,)  appears  at  Milford,  not  as 
a  free  planter  in  1639,  but  as  an  after  planter;  but  John,  his  re- 
puted father,  does  not  appear  on  record  among  either  class  of  planters, 
or  otherwise,  that  I  have  been  able  to  discover.  Joseph  ra.  Hannah,  dau. 
of  Samuel  Coley,  Sen.,  April  10,  IG13,  and  had,  Joseph,  b.  Jan.  13, 
16V4;  Hannah,  b.  March  4,  1678,  and  probably  others. 

3.  Joseph,  son  of  Joseph,  (2,)  m.  Elizabeth  Disbrow,  of  Horseneck, 
who  probably  d.  at  Milford.  He  m.  2d,  Eleanor,  and  removed  to  Wood- 
bury, Bethlera  society,  where  his  wife  d.  Sept.  15,  1753,  aged  77.  His 
death  occurred  Sept.  15,  175  4, aged  80.  Ch. :  I.  Joseph,  b.  1700; 
IT.  Ebenezer,  b.  1702  ;  HI.  Jonathan,  b.  1704  ;  IV.  and  V.  Peter  and 
John,  b.  April  6,  1709;  VI.  Betsey,  m.  Joshua  Baldwin,  and  remained 
at  Milford. 

4.  Joseph,  son  of  Joseph,  (3,)  ra.  Rachel ,  and  settled  in  West- 
bury.  Ch  :  I.  Mary,  ra.  Solomon  Steele,  Oct.  16,  1760;  II.  Joseph, 
b.  1730;  III.  Ebenezer,  b.  1731;  IV.  Philena,  m.  David  Biown  of 
Bethlem;  V.  Anna,  m.  Daniel  Steele;  VI.  Bethel,  d.  1760,  aged  22; 
VH.  Abijah,  b.  about  1743;  VIII,  Job,  b.  1744  or  '46,  d.  unmarried, 
Feb.  18,  1825  ;  IX.  Rachel,  d.  May,  1751,  aged  16. 

5.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Joseph,  (3,)  settled  early  in  Durham,  Conn. 
Cli. :  Lemuel,  Ebenezei',  (a  clergyman,)  Eleanor,  Rhoda,  Catharine? 
Mary,  Sarah  and  Anna. 

6.  Dea.  Jonathan,  son  of  Joseph,  (3,)  m.  Jan.  6,  1724-5,  Abigail 
Northrop  of  Milford,  who  d.  Oct.  18,  1756,  and  he  ra.  2d,  Widow  De- 
sire Scovil,  Mar^h  10,  1757,  and  d.  June  14,  1776.  His  widow  d.  Jan. 
2,  1795,  aged  87.  He  bought  land  in  Waterbury  in  1729,  and  re- 
moved thither  early  in  1730,  and  settled  near  the  present  residence  of 
Doct.  Porter,  East  Main  street.     He  and  his  brother  purchased  land  in 


492  HISTORY    OF   AVATERBUET. 

the  northwest  section  of  what  is  now  Watertown,  where  he  built  a 
house  and  soon  removed  his  family.  The  location  is  still  known  as 
Guernsey  Town.  Dea.  Jonathan's  two  first  ch.  were  born  at  MiUbrd  ; 
the  others  in  Waterbury.  They  were  as  follows:  I.  Abigail,  b.  Oct.  29, 
1'726,  m.  Eliphalet  Clark,  and  d.  June  11,  1746  ;  11.  Jonathan,  b.  Feb. 
28,  1729;  III.  Amos,  b.  July  3,  1731 ;  IV.  David,  b.  April   12,  1734; 

V.  Sarah,  b.  July  7,  1736,  m.  Timothy  Foote,  and  d.  Oct.   22,   1777  ; 

VI.  Samuel,  b.  Feb.  8,  1739;  VII.  Isaac,  b.  Dec.  11,  1741. 

7.  Peter,  son  of  Joseph,  (3,)  m.  Anne  Gunn  of  Milford,  Dec.  9,  1731, 
and  removed  to  Bethlem.  Ch. :  I.  Solomon,  m.  Nov.  15,  1764,  Sarah, 
dau.  of  James  Kasson  of  Bethlem;  II.  Richard,  m.  Eunice  Mallory  of 
Washington.  She  belonged  to  the  family  that  was  murdered  by  Daven- 
port. He  removed  to  Colebrook — had  a  son,  Milo,  who  became  a  phy- 
sician, also  a  dau.  Polly,  who  d.  in  Bethlem,  July  9,  1788,  aged  18; 
III.  Anna,  b.  1734,  ra.  Ebenezer  Guernsey,  d.  Feb.  6,  1804  ;  IV.  Eliza- 
beth ;  V.  Abigail ;  VI.  Sarah. 

8.  John,  son  of  Joseph,  (3,)  m.  Ann,  dau.  of  Dea.  Jeremiah  Peck, 
and  grand-dau.  of  Rev.  Jeremiah  Peck.  He  settled  in  Litchfield,  North- 
field  society,  removed  thence  to  Amenia,  N.  Y.  Ch. :  I.  John,  b.  Oct. 
28,  1734,  m.  March  24,  1757,  Azubah  Buel;  II.  x\nna,  b.  Oct.  1736; 
III.  Peter,  b.  Nov.  13,  1738,  went  to  Stanford,  N.  Y.,  where  he  has  de- 
scendants; IV.  Nathan,  b.  May  14,  1741,  settled  in  Northfield,  and  re- 
moved thence  to  Half  Moon  ;  V.  Dorcas,  b.  Feb.  23,  1744;  VI.  Noah, 
b.  Aug.  18,  1746,  settled  in  Northfield,  m.  June  7,  1770,  Hannah  IIol- 
lister,  and  d.  Sept.  18,  1820;  VII.  Daniel,  b.  May  30,  1749,  went  to 
Ballston,  N.  Y.,  thence  to  Upper  Canada;  VIII.  Lois,  b.  June  15, 1751  ; 
IX.  Eunice,  b.  Nov.  17,  1754 ;  X.  Isaac,  b.  Jan.  20,  1758. 

7.  Joseph,  son  of  Joseph,  (4,)  ra.  Mary  Brown,  April  3,  1764,  lived  in 
Watertown.  His  wife  d.  Nov.  6,  1806,  aged  71  ;  he  d.  Nov.  2,  1817. 
Ch. :  I.  Mary,  b.  June  14,  1755,  ra.  Amos  Hitchcock  ;  H.  Anna,  b.  Dec. 
10, 1757,  m.  Col.  Aner  Bradley,  and  d.  July,  1844  ;  IIL  Bethel  Chaun- 
cey,  b.  March  27,  1760,  m.  Betsey  Mallory,  and  had  Joseph,  Landon, 
Chauncey,  Bethel,  Charlotte  and  Betsey.  Charlotte  m.  Henry  S.  At- 
wood  and  Betsey  ra.  Harvey  Atwood;  IV.  Moranah,  b.  March  1,  1762, 
m.  Demas  Judd  ;  V.  Lucy,  b.  May  22,  1764,  m.  Dr.  E.  Davis,  and  d. 
Sept.  1827;  VL  Joseph,  b.  June  18,  1766,  m.  Rachel,  dau.  of  Samuel 
Guernsey,  and  had  Joseph,  Harriet,  Rena,  Smedley,  Hawkins,  Jennette 
and  a  ch.  that  d.  young  ;  VII.  Philena,  b.  April  28,  1768,  ra.  Dea.  Buck- 
ingham ;  VIII.  Theodore,  b.  April  16,  1770,  m.  Diodema  Beach  ;  IX. 
Anthony,  b.  Aug.  18,  1773,  ra.  Melliscent  Sldlton,  who  d.  May  25, 1839> 
aged  66,  and  he  m.  2d, Martha  B.  Skilton,  June  7, 1841,  and  d.  Dec.  30, 


APPENDIX.  493 

1848.  He  had  no  issue  by  first  wife  ;  by  second  wife,  Javvis  and  Clem- 
entine ;  X.  Friend,  b.  June  23,  1775,  m  Sarah  Castle,  who  d.  Oct.  23, 
1801,  and   he  m.  Mary  A.  Atwood,   and   d.   Oct.  20,1835.      His  eh. 

were:  Denrif,  b.   Sept.   22,  1796,  m.  Esther  Bryan;  Augusta,  m. 

Ilawkins. 

10,  Ebenezer,  son  of  Joseph,  (4,)  m.  Anna,  dau.  of  Peter  Guernsey. 
He  lived  in  Bethlem,  and  d.  Feb.  6,  1804.  Ch. :  I.  Rachel,  m.  Titus 
Hotchkiss  of  Waterbury  ;  II.  Eunice,  in.  Ebenezer  Church  ;  III.  Philo, 
m.  Irena  Murray,  went  to  Genesee,  and  d.  about  1807  ;  IV.  Peter,  b. 
Oct,  20,  1767,  m.  Lucina  Minor  of  Woodbury,  June  4,  1793,  and  d. 
Oct.  11,  1824.  His  ch.  were,  Lucy,  m.  O.  Cowles ;  Mary,  m.  Joel  At- 
wood; Melliscent,  b.  Oct.  12,  1801,  m.  Willis  Downs,  now  of  Wood- 
bury ;  Julia,  b.  Dec.  1805,  d.  1828  ;  Harriet,  b.  1808,  ni.  Harlow  Rus- 
sell of  Watertown ;  Susan,  b.  1811,  d.  young;  V.  Anna,  ra.  Moses 
"Wright  of  Colebrook;  VI.  Abijah,  b.  April  1,  1774,  m.  Anne  Hotch- 
kiss of  Waterbury,  April  16,  1797,  and  d.  Oct.  16,  1846.  He  had 
Ebenezer,  b.  1798,  m.  Maria  Cowles  of  Bethlem;  Althea,  b.  1799,  m. 
Asahel  Hotchkiss,  and  d.  in  Sharon,  Sept.  9,  1836  ;  Hannah,  m.  Amos 
Hotchkiss  of  Sharon;  Doiha,  b.  1803 ;  Minerva,  b.  1805;  IIeinieit;i, 
b.  1808,  m.  Amos  Clark  of  Watertown. 

11,  Abijah,  son   of  Joseph,  (4,)  m.  Lucy  Bellamy,  who  d.  May  28, 

1805,  aged   60.     He   m.   2d,  Araminta  ,  and   d.   May  22,   1819. 

Ch.  :  L  Frances,  b.  March,  1778,  m.  March  10,  1799,  Solomon  G. 
Steele,  and  d.  in  1802  ;  H,  Silence,  b.  July  14,  1781,  m.  Tola  Webster, 
Feb.  10,  1804;  IH.  William,  b,  Jan.  25,  1784,  m,  March  13,  1805, 
Hannah  Parker  of  Wallingford,  and  had  Nancy  Ann,  Joshua  Sherman, 
Philena,  John  J.  and  Rebecca;  IV,  A  dau.,  d,  young. 

12,  Jonathan,  son  of  Dea.  Jonathan,  (6,)  m.  Desire,  dau.  of  Joseph 
Bronson,  June  5,  1755,  and  d,  April  10,  1805,  in  Watertown.  She  d. 
Dric,  1796.  Ch.:  L  MeUicent,  b.  March  24,  l7o6,  d.  Aug.,  1756; 
IL  Mellicent.b.  May  21,  1757,  ra.  Lieut.  Osborne,  Dec.  6,  1771,  d.  in 
1803  ;  IIL  Daniel,  b.  July  18,  1760,  m.  Huldah  Seymour,  of  Water- 
town,  removed  to  Blue  Lick,  Indiana,  and  d.  April  28,  1840.  He 
had,  William,  m.  Hannah  French,  and  was  drowned,  May,  1839  ;  Sey- 
mour, m. Blakeslee  of  Watertown,  and  resides  at  Blue  Lick,  In- 
diana ;  Grey ;  Mellicent,  m.  Isaac  Townsend  ;  Anna,  m. Brigtrs ; 

Polly,  m.  Jacob  Lane ;  Bronson,  m. Kelly,  and  lives  in  Iowa  ;  IV, 

Southmayd,  b.  April  10,  1763,  m.,  Sabra  Scott,  of  Watertown,  and  had 
Raphael,  who  (1.  in  1837;  Laura,  m,  Nehemiah  Clark;  Rebecca,  m, 
Asahel  Stone,  of  Michigan  ;  Jonathan,  resides  in  Michigan ;  Amanda, 
wife  of    Jonathan  Comer  of  Ashlev,  Ohio ;  V,  James,    b.    March    27, 


49  i  mSTOKY    OF   WATERBUET. 

1767,  m.  Anner  Blalceslee  of  Plymouth,  June  3,  1798,  who  d.  Marcli 
14,  1801,  and  he  m.  2d,  Deborah,  dau.  of  Deacon  David  "Wilcockson 
of  Huntington,  Jan.  12,  1806.  He  d.  Nov.  23,  1853  ;  his  widow,  Jan. 
10,  1854,  aged  83.  He  lived  in  Watertown.  Cli.  :  Adele,  b.  Aug.  19, 
1799,  d.  Dec.  1,  1799  ;  Anner,  b.  July  4,  1807,  m.  David  H.  Curtiss  of 
Woodbury,  April  26,  1829;  Maria,  b.  Aug.  3,  1809,  ra.  William  Bas- 
sett  of  Litchfield,  July  25,  1832,  and  resides  in  Watertown  ;  David  B., 
d.  Sept.  1,  1828,  aged  14;  VI.  Sidney,  b.  May  7,  1772,  m.  Abner 
Hard  of  Watertown,  Nov.  10,  1814. 

13.  Amos,  son  of  Dea.  Jonathan,  (6,)  m.  Esther,  dau.  of  Joseph 
Blake  of  Waterbury,  Feb.  16,  1756.  Ch. :  I.  Abigail,  b.  Nov.  9,  1756  ; 
n.  Amos,  b.  Oct.  23,  1758,  went  to  the  State  of  N.  Y.,  had  two  ch.; 
HI.  Esther,  b.  June  9,  1760,  d.    Sept.  5,  1780;  IV.  Joel,   b.   Jan.  1], 

1763,  m.  1st, Strickland,    2d,    Fanny  Judd    of  Windsor,    N.   Y., 

had  by  his  first  wife,  William  and  Blake,  by  2d,  Mary  P.,  Ruth  M.  and 

Fanny  P.;  V.  Eldad,  b.  Sept.  5,  1764,  m. Strickland,  and  went 

to  the  State  of  N.  Y. ;  VI.  Annis,  b.  1766,  d.  same  year ;  VII.  Annis, 

b.  I767,m. Stowe  ;  VIII.  Ruth,  b.  March  2,]  769,  m.  S.  Atwood,  d. 

in  1801 ;  IX.  Parthena,  b.  March  6,  177  I,  m. Osborne;  X.  Phebe, 

m. Whitmore    of  Harpersfield,  N.  Y.;  XL  Sybil,  m. AVells. 

Amos,  the  father  of  this  family,  removed  to  the  State  of  N.  Y.,  where 
he  died. 

14.  Danmel,  son  of  Dea.  Jonathan,  (6,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Samuel 
Judd,  June  6,  1754.  She  d.  in  1776,  and  he  m.  iVbigail  Turner,  and 
removed  to  Harpersfield,  N.  Y.  Ch. :  I.  Hannah,  b.  April,  1755,  m. 
Doolittle;  IL  Irene,  b.  Sept.  19,  l7.'i6,  m.  Dea.  Dayton  of  Wa- 
tertown, and  d.  Feb.  27,  1788  ;  IIL  David,  b.  March  3,  1758,  m.  Mary, 
dau.  of  William  Judd,  removed  to  Harpersfield,  N.  Y.,  and  had  a 
child,  which  d,  in  1791,  also  Hannah,  Miranda,  Pamelia,  Sally  and 
Polly;  IV.  Rebekah,  b.  March  30,  1760,  m.  Christopher  Merriam,  of 
Watertown  ;  V.  Olive,   b.    May    4,    1762,  m.  James  Merriam,  and  d. 

Feb.  16,  1798  ;  VI.  Isaac,  m. Judd,  and  lived  at  Harpersfield,  N. 

Y.  ;  VH.  Sarah,  ra. Mattoon,  and  went  to  Vt. ;  VIII.  Elizabeth, 

m. Harrison,    and  went    to  Whitestow^n,  N.   Y.  ;  IX.  Ezra  ;  X. 

Esther. 

15.  Samuel,  son  of  Dea.  Jonathan,  (6,)  m.  Rachel  Latimer,  of  Mil- 
ford,  (?)  May  10,  1764,  who  d.  in  1765,  and  he  m.  C.  Smedley  and  d.  at 
Naugatuck,  in  1819.  Ch.  :  I.  Samuel,  b.  April,  1765,  went  to  Canada, 
and  d.  there  ;  II.  Rachel,  b.  Aug.  13,  1767,  m.  Joseph  Guernsey,  Jr.; 
IH.  Irene,  (?)  b.  May  22,  1770  ;  IV.  Currence,  b.  May  28,  1772,— 
probably  others. 


AFrENDIX.  495 

16.  Isaac,  son  of  Dea.  Jonathan,  (6,)  is  said  to  Lave  settled  in 
Northampton,  Mass.,  where  he  m. Gulliver  and  d.  soon  after. 

17.  John,  son  of  John,  (8,)  had  in  Litchfield,  Azubah,  b.  July  6, 
1758  ;  Sarah,  b.  Aug.  30,  1760,  He  removed  to  Amenia,  N.  Y.,  where 
he  had  Isaac,  Lois,  Eachel,  Ebenezer  and  Rhoda. 

1  8.  Noah,  son  of  John,  (8,)  lived  in  Northfield.  Ch.  :  I,  Hannah, 
b.  May  10,  1771,  m.  Thomas  Merriam,  of  Watertown,  and  had  eight 
cb. ;  IL  Rachel,  b.  Sept.  3,  1773,  m.  Isaac  Clark  of  Watertown,  and 
had  seven  ch.  ;  IIL  Samuel,  b.  Aug.  31,  1775,  m.  1st,  Laura  Johnson, 
2d,  Mabel  Heaton  ;  IV.  Noah,  b.  Eeb.  5,  1778,  d.  1778  ;  V.  Anna, 
b.  Aug.  12,  1779,  m.  Levi  Heaton,  and  d.  about  1818, — had  five  ch. ; 
VI.  Clarissa,  b.  March  18,  1782,  m.  Elijah  Warner,  and  had  four  ch.  ; 
VIL  Polly,  b.  May  27,  1785,  m.  Gervase  Blakeslee  ;  VIH.  Noah,  b. 
1787,  d.  1788  ;  IX,  John,  b.  March  20,  1789,  m.  Laura  Morse  and 
resides  in  Northfield  ;  X.  Noah,  b.  April  16,  1793,  m.  Amanda  Crosby  ; 
XL  Caroline,  b.  1797,  d.  1801. 

HARRISON. 

1.  Thomas  Harrison,  from  England,  settled  in  New  Haven,  in  tliat 
part  now  East  Haven.  He  took  the  oath  of  fidelity  at  New  Haven, 
April  4,  1654.  He  had  three  brothers  who  came  with  him  to  this 
country,  viz:  Richard,  Benjamin  and  Nathaniel.  Richard  was  a  few 
years  at  Branford,  but  removed  to  New  Jersey.  Nathaniel  and  Ben- 
jamin settled  in  Virginia.  Benjamin,  it  is  said,  was  grandfather  of  the 
late  President  William  H.  Harrison.  Thomas  m.  1st,  the  wid.  of  John 
Thompson  of  New  Haven,  and  2d,  wid.  Elizabeth  Stent,  Marcli  29, 
1060.  His  ch.  were,  Thomas,  b.  March  1,  1657;  Nathaniel,  b.  Dec. 
13,  1658;  Elizabeth,  b.  Jan,  1667  ;  John;  Samuel;  Isaac  and  Mary. 

2.  Thomas,  son  of  Thos.  (1,)  m.  Margaret  Stent,  dau.  of  his  step- 
mother. Ch. :  I.  Lydia,  b.  1690  ;  II.  Jemima,  b.  1692  ;  HI.  Thomas,  h. 
Oct.  12,  1694,  removed  to  Litchfield  ;  IV.  Abigail,  b.  Nov.  17,  1696  ;  V. 
Benjamin,  b.  Aug.  7,  1698,  settled  in  Waterbury ;  VI.  Joseph,  b.  May 
25,  1700  ;  VIL  David,  b.  Feb.  7,  1702  ;  VIH.  Aaron,  b.  March  4,  1704, 
d.  1708 ;  IX.  Jacob,  b.  Oct.  23,  1708,  d.  1748. 

3.  Thomas,  son  of  Thos.  (2,)  m.  Elizabeth  Sutliff",  April  21,  1721,  and 
lived  for  a  time  in  the  east  part  of  North  Branford.  He  purchased  1000 
acres  of  land  in  Litchfield,  in  the  eastern  part  of  the  parish  of  South 
Farms,  to  which  he  removed  in  1639.  He  gave  100  acres  of  land  to 
each  of  his  nine  sons,  reserving  only  100  for  himself.  He  was  chosen 
deacon  of  the  First  church  in  Litchfield  in  1755.  Ch. :  Thomas, 
Ephraifti,  Gideon,  Titus,  Abel,  Jacob,  Lemuel,  Elihu  and  Levi. 


496  HISTORY   OF   AVATERBCTRT. 

4.  Benjamin,  son  of  Tbos.  (2,)   m.  Oct.   19,  1720,  Mary ,  and 

settled  in  Fanningbury  parish,   Waterbury.     He  d.  in  1760,  leaving  his 

wife    Mary    and   ch.,   viz:  Abigail,  ni.   Warner;  Benjamin    and 

Aaron. 

5.  Lemuel,  son  of  Thos.  (3.)  m.  "in  his  24lh  year,"  Lois  Barnes, 
Feb.  18,  1762,  and  d.  Sept.  9,  1807.  Ch. :  L  Timothy,  b.  1763,  d. 
1800;  IL  Lemuel,  b.  1765,  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Thos,  Clark,  is  living  in 
Waterbury;  IIL  James,  b.  17G7;  IV.  Phebe,  b.  1769,  d.  1797;  V. 
Worster,  b.  1772  ;  VI.  Onley,  b.  1774  ;  VIL  Lois,  b.  1776  ;  VIIL  An- 
drew, b.  1779,  d.  1810  ;  IX.  Caroline,  b.  1785. 

6.  Benjamin,  son  of  Benj.  (4,)  ra.  Dinah,  dau.  of  Benj.  Warner,  Dec. 
24,  1741,  and  d.  March  13,  1760,  in  his  39th  year.  Ch. :  L  James,  b. 
Oct.  1742,  d.  1760 ;  IL  Jabez,  b.  Oct.  1744  ;  IIL  Lydia,  b.  Sept.  1747 ; 
IV.  Samuel,  b.  Sept.  1750,  d.  1750;  V.  Rozel,  b.  Dec.  1751  ;  VL  Dan- 
iel, b.  July,  1754,  m.  Phebe  Blakeslee,  1774. 

7.  Aaron,  son  of  Benj.  (4,)  m.  Jerusha,  dau.  of  Obed  Warner,  Oct. 
26,  1748.  He  was  chosen  deacon  of  the  church  in  Farmingbury,  (now 
Wolcott,)  at  its  organization,  Nov.  18,  1773,  which  office  he  continued 
to  fill  until  his  death.  Ch. :  L  Jared,  b.  1749;  Mark,  b.  Aug.  1751, 
ra.  Rebecca  Miles,  1775  ;  III.  Samuel,  b.  March,  1753  ;  IV.  David,  b. 
Marcli,l756  ;  V.  John,  b.  Dec.  1758,  d.  1776;  VI.  Lucy,  b.  March,  1762. 

HICKOX, 

niCOX,    HIKCOX,    HECOCK,    IIICKCOCK,    <SiC. 

1.  Sergt.  Samuel  Hickox,  had  ch. :  Samuel,  Hannah,  William, 
Thomas,  Joseph,  Mary,  Elizabeth,  Stephen,  Benjamin,  Mercy,  Ebenezer. 
(See  p.  148.) 

2.  Joseph,  probably  brother  of  Samuel,  (1,)  lived  in  Farmington  and 
Watei'bury.  From  the  latter  place  he  went  to  Woodbury,  where  he 
d.  in  1687,  leaving  the  following  ch. :  T.  Joseph,  m.  Ruth  Fairchild 
of  AVoodbury,  in  1697;  II.  Benjamin,  m.  Hannah  Skeel  of  Woodbury, 
in  1697;  HI.  Mary,  ra.  Joseph  Gaylord,  Jr.,  of  Waterbury,  went  to 
Durham;  IV.  Elizabeth,  m.  John  Gaylord  of  Waterbury  ;  A\  Samuel, 
in.,  had  a  family  and  lived  in  Woodbury.  (See  Cothren's  Woodbury, 
p.  564.) 

3.  Samuel,  son  of  Sergt.  Samuel,  (1,)  had  ch.  as  follows:  I.  A  dau.; 
II,  Ebenezer,  went  to  Danbury ;  HI,  Samuel;  IV.  John;  V.  Han- 
nah ;  VL  Elizabeth ;  VIL  A  son ;  VHI.  Gideon ;  IX.  Sarah  ;  X. 
Silence. 

4.  Capt,  William,  son  of  Samuel,  (1,)  had  ch. :  I, ;     IL  Wil- 


a 


fir 


t=! 

5A.-^.-^' 

^ 

CL-1 

iT" 

' 

g 

^ 

P' 

o 

,,o 

© 

\W|h^    Tfa  ■^^■~'v 

^^k>  1  "^1 

?r/ 

m 


APPENDIX.  497 

Ham;  KI.  Samuel;  IV.  Abraham;  V.  John;  IV  Rebecca;  VII. 
Rachel;  VIIL  Hannah. 

5.  Dea.  Thomas,  son  of  Simuel,  (1.)  C!i.  :  I.  Thomas,  b.  Oct.  2  5, 
1701;  ir.  Mary,  b.  May  28,  1704,  d.  April  30,  1703;  III.  Mary,  b. 
March  9,  1706-7,    m.  Dea.  .John  Warner;  IV.  Sirah,  b.  Jan.  2,  1709- 

10,  ra.  Daniel  Benedict;  V.  Mercy,  m.  Isaac  Hopkins;  VI.  Amos,  b. 
Aug.  19,  1715;  VII.  Jonas,  b.  Oct.  30,    1717  ;   VIIL   Smiil.  b.   Aug. 
30,  1720;  IX.  Susanna,  b.  March  25,    172  i,  m.  (>jorg3  Xich  )ls.  Djc. 
15,  1741  ;  X,  James,  b.  June  26,  1726,  d.  young. 

6.  Eben'ezer,  son  of  Samuel,  (1,)  m.  1st,  Esther  Hine,  Dec.  1714, 
2d,  Abigail,  dau.  of  Samuel  Stevens  of  West  Haven,  Aug.  28,  1729. 
He  removed  to  Bethel  soc.  in  Danbury.  His  ch.  recorded  in  Water- 
bury,  were  as  follows:  I.  Esther,  b.  July  10,  1715,  m.  Stephen  Kelsey, 
son  of  Stephen  of  Wethersfield,  Aug.  25,  1733;  11.  Samuel,  b.  Dec. 
20,  1716;  III.  Ambrose,  b.  Sept.  2,  1718;  IV.  Elizabeth,  b.  Sept. 
1720,  m.  Richard  Nichols,  Aug.  10,  1744;  Y.  Abigail,  b.  Aug.  8,  1722  ; 
VI.  Ebenezer,  b.  July  21,  1730;  VII.  David,  b.  Jan.  30,  1732;  VIII. 
John,  b.  April,  17,  1734  ;  IX.  Seth,  b.  Dec.  5,  1741. 

7.  Ebsxezer,  son  of  Samuel,  (3,)  settled  in  Bethel  soc,  Danbury, 
about  1725.     He  had  sons,  Ebenezer,  Maj.  Benjamin  and  Capt.  Samuel. 

8.  John,  son  of  Samuel,  (3,)  m.  Miry,  dau.  of  Joseph  Gay  lord  of 
Durham,  Nov.  18,  1719,  and  probably  had  children. 

9.  Gideon,  son  of  Samuel,  (3,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Stephen  Upson,  Aug. 
15,  1734.  Ch.:  I.  James,  b.  Feb.  11, 1734-5, drowned,  Feb.  12,  1744-5  ; 

11.  Jemima,  b.  Nov.  24,  1736,  m.  Ira  Beebe,  Aug.  1758  ;  III.  Samuel, 
b.  Sept.  1,  1739;  IV.  Sarah,  b.  June  3,  1744,  m.  Austin  Smith;  V. 
James,  b.  Nov.  28,  1746;  VI.  Lucy,  b.  June  20,  1749;  VII.  Gideon,  b. 
May  4,  1752  ;  VHI.  Elizabeth,  b.  Nov.  28,  1754. 

10.  Capt.  Samuel,  son  of  William,  (4,)  xn.  Mary,  dau.  of  John  Hop- 
kins, March  8,  1721,  andd.  May  13,  1765.  She  d.  Aug.  19,  1768. 
Ch.  :  I.  Mary,  b.  Oct.  30,  1721,  m.  Richard  Seymour,  May  20,  1740,  d, 
July  15,  1744;  II.  Mehitable,  b.  Nov.  22,  1723,  ra.  Stephen  Seymour, 
March  18,  1741,  d.  May  9,  1767;  III.  William,  b.  Jan.  14,  1725-6; 
IV.  Abraham,  b.  Jan.  11,  1727-8  ;  V.  John,  b.  July  26,  1730;  VI. 
Samuel,  b.  Sept.  8,  1733;  VII.  Dorcas,  b.  July  11,  1736,  m.  John 
Welton,  Jan.  5,  1758. 

11.  Thomas,  son  of  Dea.  Thomas,  (5,)  m.  Miriam,  wid.  of  Samuel 
Richards,  April  19,  1738,  and  d.  Dec.  28,  1787.  His  wife  d.  March  13, 
1780.  Ch.:  I.  Thomas,  b.  April  4,  1737;  II.  Susanna,  b.  March  30, 
1739;  III.  Daniel,  b.  Dec.  16,  1742;  IV.  James,  b.  Jan.  19,  1747-8, 
d.  1749  ;  V.  James,  b.  May  8,  1755. 

32 


498  HISTORY   OF   WATERBUKT. 

12.  Amos,  son  of  Dea.  Thomas,  (5,)  m.  Mercy,  wid.  of  Benjamin 
Richards,  March  15,  1V40.  Shed.  July  19,  1787.  He  d.  March  1, 
1805.  Ch. :  T.  Freelove,  b.  April  28,  1741,  m.  Stephen  Scott,  Nov.  30, 
1758;  II.  Amos,  b.  March  18,  1742-3,  d.  1749;  III.  Elisha,  b.  March 
3,  1744-5:  IV.  Mercy,  b.  Jan.  25,  1746-7,  d.  1752;  V.  Amos,  b. 
Nov.  12,  1749  ;  VI.  Joseph,  b.  March  12,  1752. 

13.  Dea.  Samuel,  son  of  Dea.  Thomas,  (5,)  was  one  of  the  early  set- 
tlers of  Westbury,  and  contributed  much  towards  the  establishment  of 
the  good  state  of  society,  which  has  ever  prevailed  in  that  town.  He 
was  a  dea.  in  the  church,  capt.  of  the  militia,  representative  to  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly,  &c.  He  gave  freedom  to  the  only  slave  he  ever  owned. 
He  m.  1st,  Elizabeth,  dau.  or  George  Welton,  Nov.  26,  1741.  She  d. 
June  7,  1809,  and  his  death  occurred  April  6,  1811.  Ch.:  I.  Jonas, 
b.  Aug.  20,  1742,  m.  Abigail,  dau.  of  Eliphalet  Clark,  in  1766,  and  d. 
in  Sept.  6,  1826;  II.  Mary,  b.  Jan.  12,  1744-5,  d.  same  month;  III. 
Mary,  b.  Sept.  16,  1746,  d.  1749  ;  IV.  Samuel,  b.  June  9,  1749;  V. 
Elizabeth,  b.  April  29,  1752,  m.  Thomas  Bronson,  Aug.  25,  1774;  VI. 
Hannah,  b.  Aug.  24,  1754,  ra.  John  Nettleton,  Jr.  and  d.  Aug.  8,  1784. 
He  d.  Sept.  19,  1808  ;  VIL  Eli,  b.  June  17,  1757,  m.  Mary  Bucking- 
bam,  and  d.  April  30,  1788.  She  d.  Sept.  25,  1827  ;  VIII.  Josiah,  b. 
Sept.  9,  1760. 

14.  Ambrose,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (7,)  lived  in  Waterbury,  m.  Eunice, 
dau.  of  Caleb  Clark,  Dec.  11,  1740,  and  d.  June  1,  1792,  a.  74.  Ch. : 
I.  Ambrose,  b.  Aug.  28,  1741,  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  John  Dowd  of  Middle- 
town,  June,  1762,  and  had  Eunice  and  Gideon  ;  II.  Ruth,  b.  Dec.  18, 
1743,  m.  AbijahWilmot;  III.  Gideon,  b.  April  19,  1746,  d.  1763;  IV. 
Margery,  b.  Oct.  6,  1748  ;  V.  Marcy,b.  Sept.  26,  1752  ;  VI.  Ebenezer, 
b.  May  29,  1754  ;  VII.  Benjamin,  b.  April  19,  1756,  d.  1769. 

15.  Jo^^J,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (6,)  m.  Lydia  Kellogg,  March  29,  1757. 
She  was  b.  April  5,  1740.  Ch, :  I.  John,  b.  Sept.  24,  1759,  d.  Sept. 
1776;  II.  Lydia,  b.  Jan.  2,  1762,  m.  Jesse  Richards;  III.  Seth,  b.  Jan. 
6,  1764,  d.  March  5,  1773  ;  IV.  Jesse,  b.  Nov.  4, 1769  ;  V.  Rachel  B., 
b.  July  3,  1771,  m.  Stephen  Camp  ;  VI.  Seth,  b.  Sept.  22,  1773,— was 
living  in  1856,  at  New  Canaan;  VII.  Eliaseph,  b.  May  29,  1776,  d. 
Oct.  7,  1777  ;  VIII.  Peninah,  (?)  b.  Feb.  15,  177S,  m.  Ezra  Hoyt ;  IX. 
Melliscent,  b.  Sept.  14,  1780,  m.  Jonathan  B.  Benedict. 

16.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (7,)  had  a  son  Zar,  who  was  father 
of  Rev.  Laurens  P.  Hickok,  D.  D.,  formerly  pastor  of  the  Congrega- 
tional churches  at  Kent  and  Litchfield,  Conn.  From  Litchfield  he 
went  to  the  Western  Reserve  College,  where  he  was  a  professor  several 
years,  and  thence  to  the  Theological  Seminary,  Auburn,  N.  Y.,  where  he 


APPENDIX.  499 

was  also  a  professor.  He  is  at  present  (1856)  in  Union  Col.,  Roches- 
ter, N.  Y. 

17.  Maj.  Benjamin,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (7,)  had  a  son  Eli,  who  was 
father  of  Benjamin  Eli  Hickox  of  New  York  City. 

18.  Capt.  Samuel,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (7,)  had  sons,  I.  Daniel,  m.  and 
had  Ely,  Plinley,  Starr,  Nathaniel  Hoyt  and  Amos.  Plinley  is  father 
of  Rev.  Henry,  of  Elmira,  N.  Y.,  also  of  George  S.  and  Francis  S.  of 
New    York  City  ;  H.  Noah,  had  John  and  Harvey  of  New  York  City  ; 

III.  Amos,  d.  at  Fort  George,  in  1814. 

19.  Samuel,  son  of  Gideon,  (9,)  m.  Eleanor,  dau.  of  Obadiah  War- 
ner, June  4,  1761.  She  d.  Nov.  14, 1767,  and  hem.  2d,  Charity  Dixon, 
Nov.  10,  1768.  Ch.:  I.  Asee,  b.  Aug.  14,  1762;  H.  Enos,  b.  April 
22,  1764  ;  HI.  A  dau.,  b.  Nov.  24,  1765  ;  IV.  A  son,  b.  Sept.  3,  1767  ; 
V.  Silvia,  b.  Jan.  20,  1770;  VI.  Charity,  b.  July  15,  1773  ;  VII.  Sam- 
uel Johnson,  b.  Oct.  31,  1775  ;  VIII.  Sophia,  b.  July  26,  1778. 

20.  James,  son  of  Gideon,  (9,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Austin  Smith, 
Nov.  28,  1766.     Ch. :  I.  Olive,  b.  May  7,  1774. 

21.  Gideon,  son  of  Gideon,  (9,)  m.  Phebe,  dau.  of  Austin  Smith, 
Aug.  29,  1771.  Ch.:  I.  David,  b.  Dec.  8,  1772;  II.  Sarah,  b.  April 
1:^,^774;  III.  Polly,  b.  March  4,  1777;  IV.  Hannah  S.,  b.  July  2, 
1781. 

22.  AViLLiAM,  son  of  Capt.  Samuel,  (9,)  m.  Lydia  Seymour,  April 
4,  1745,  who  d.  June  19,  1762,  and  he  m.  2d,  Abigail,  dau.  of  Edmund 
Scott,  Jan.  12,  1763.  Ch. :  I.  William,  b.  Jan.  14,  1746  ;  II.  Consider, 
b.  June  21,  174S;  III.  Abigail,  b.  July  28,  1751,  m.  Thomas  Welton ; 

IV.  Lydia,  b.  July  29,  1757  ;  V.  Rebecca,  b.  Oct.  14,  1759  ;  VI.  Chloe, 
b.  Feb.  7,  1764;  VII.  Hannah,  b.Oct.  31,  1765  ;  VIII.  Asahel,  b.  Nov. 
22,  1767. 

23.  Capt.  Abraham,  son  of  Capt.  Samuel,  (10,)  m.  Jemima,  dau.  of 
Thomas  Foote,  April  19,  1748.  Shed.  May  20,  1779.  Hed.in  1777  or 
1778,  in  the  British  army.  Ch. :  I.  Mary,  b.  July  2, 1748,  m.  Seba  Bron- 
son  ;  H.Lucy,  b.  Feb.  13,  1749-50,  m.  Simeon  Scott;  HI.  Jesse,  b. 
April  12,  1752  ;  IV.  Jared,  b.  Jan.  15, 1756  ;  V.Joel,  b.  April  8,  1858  ; 
VL  Timothy,  b.  Jan.  5,  1761  ;  VH.  Abraham,  b.  June  2,  1765  ;  VIIL 
Samuel,  b.  Jan.  1,  1767  ;  IX.  Preserved,  b.  Nov.  6,  1768. 

24.  John,  son  of  Capt.  Samuel,  (10,)  m.  Aner,  dau.  of  Doct.  Benja- 
min Warner,  July  1,  1754.  Ch. :  I.  Asa,  b.  Jan.  23,  1755;  II.  Joanna, 
b.  Sept.  7,  1756;  IH.  Sabra,  b.  Aug.  21,  1759;  IV.  Aner,  b.  March 
24,  1761  ;  V.  Lncinda,  b.  March  6,  1763;  VL  John,  b.  Jan.  14,  1765; 
VH.  Mary,  b.  March  16,  1767  ;  VIIL  William  W.,  b.  Feb.  1,  1769  ;  IX. 
Sarah  Anna,  b.  Jan.  7,  1771. 


500  HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 

25.  Thomas,  son  of  Dea.  Thomas,  (11,)  m.  Lois,  dau.  of  Thomas 
Richards,  July  17,  1*760.  She  d.  May  11,  1764,  and  he  m.  2d,  Thank- 
ful, dau.  of  Stephen  Seymour,  May    12,   1765.     Ch.  :   I.  Sarah,  b.  May 

12,  1762  ;  II.  Lois,  b.  March  29,  1766,  d.  1766  ;  IIL  Thomas,  b.  Oct.  19, 
1776  ;  IV.  Lois  R.,  b.  Oct.  29, 1769  ;  V.  Mark,  b.May  23, 1773  ;  YI.  Ira, 
b.  March  24,  1775  ;  VII.  Isaac,  b.  July  5,  1778. 

26.  Daniel,  son  of  Dea.  Thomas,  (11,)  m.  Sibel  Bartholomew,  or 
Williams,  Jan.  15,  1766,  who  d.  April   2,   1774,  and   he  ra.  2d,  Phebe 

Orton,  July  5,  1775.     Ch.:  I.  Caleb,  b.  Oct.  18,  1766,  m. Scovill, 

and  d.  March  9,  1813.  He  was  father  of  Edward  Hickox  of  Water- 
town.  IL  Daniel,  b.  Feb.  11,  1769,  m.  Polly  Brown,  and  d.  Oct.  21, 
1823  ;  III.  Mary.b.  May  5, 1771,  d.  1772  ;  IV.Chauncey,b.  July  12, 1773; 
V.  Eleazer,  b.  July  25,  1776  ;  VI.  Mary,  b.  Jan.  23,  1778  ;  VII.  Uri,  b. 
Aug.  8,  1779;  VIIL  Merriam,  b.   Aug.   1,  1781;  IX.  Sybbel,  b.  Oct. 

13,  1783. 

27.  Samuel,  son  of  Samuel,  (13,)  m.  Dec.  5,  l77l,  Sarah  Scovill,  who 
d.  Oct.  1,  1776.     He  d.  Sept.  9,  1778,— no  ch. 

28.  JosiAH,  son  of  Samuel,  (13,)  m.  Phebe,  dau.  of  John  Stoddard 
of  W.jodbury,  Dec.  2,  1779,  and  d.  Sept.  20,  1786.  Ch. :  L  Hannah,  b. 
April  6,  1781,  m.  Asa  AVoodward,  April  6,  1801.  She  d.  April  14, 
1851.  Ch. :  I.  Charles  S.  Woodward— resides  in  Northfield.  II.  Sam- 
uel, b.  Jan.  17,  1783,  m.  Huldah  Bradley,  and  d.  Oct.  1839.  He  had  a 
Son  Samuel  Josiah,  b.  Oct.  20,  1806,  and  d.  Oct.  18, 1832.  IIL  Josiah, 
b.  Feb.  13,  1786,  d.  Jan.  10,  1787. 

29.  Jesse,  son  of  John,  (15,)  m.  Betsey  Hoyt,  Nov.  24,  1791, — resid- 
ed in  New  Canaan,  until  his  ch.  were  born, — removed  thence  to  Sarato- 
ga Co.,  N.  Y. — thence  to  Cayuga  Co.,  and  d.  near  Newark,  Wayne  Co., 
N.  Y.,  Oct.  8,  1826.  Ch. :  I,  John  IL,  b.  Nov.  27,  1792,  d.  Jan.  14, 
1841  ;  IL  Albert,  b.  July  23,  1797— removed  to  Michigan  about  1820, 
and  lives,  (1857,)  in  Blis>field,  Lenawee  Co.,  Mich. ;  III.  Emeline,  b.  Nov. 
13,  1800,  m.  Doct.  George  R.  Powers,  and  d.  Oct.  24, 1854  ;  IV.  Emilia, 
b.  July  23,  1802,  m.  S.  A.  Holbrook ;  Y.  Elizabeth,   b.  May  23,   1804, 

m.  Rev.  Solomon  Stearns,  and  lives  in  Somerset,  Mich. ;  YI.  Rev.  S. , 

b.  1809,  d.  Oct.  7,  1820. 

30.  Samuel  J.,  son  of  Samuel,  (19,)  m.  Laura,  dau.  of  Amos  Culver, 
Oct.  15, 1800.  Ch.:  L  Selden,  b.  Sept.  22,  1801,  d.  1803  ;  IL  Sally,  b. 
Aug.  3,  1804;  lY.  Samuel  H,,  b.  April  16,  1810— perhaps  others. 

31.  Jesse,  son  of  Capt.  Abraham,  (23,)  m.  Hannah  Strong,  July  27, 
1775,  who  d.  Dec.  21,  1778,  and  he  m.  2d,  Rhoda  Thomas,  April  26, 
1780.  She  d.  Feb.  20,  1781,  and  he  m.  3d,  Hannah,  wid.  of  Nathaniel 
Tompkins,  Aug.  16,  1781.  Ch. :  L  Zenas,  b.  June  7,  1776  ;  IL  Molly, 
b  Dec.  17,  1777;  IIL  A  son,  b.  Feb.  14,  1781— perhaps  others. 


APPENDIX.  501 

32.  Jared,  son  of  Capt.  Abraham,  (23,)  m.  Rachel,  dau.  of  Caleb  Mer- 
rills, Feb.  V,  1777.  Ch. :  I.  Lucy,  b.  Dec.  6,  1777  ;  II.  Nathaniel,  b. 
Feb.  16,  1779;  III.  Jemima,  b.  April  25,  1780  ;  IV.  Hannah,  b.  Dec. 
12,  1782,  d.  July  22,  1785  ;  V.  Hannah,  b.  July  22,  1785;  VI.  Asa,  b. 
Sept.  12,  1787;  VII.  Eri,  b.  Feb.  19,  1790;  VIII.  Esther,  b.  Sept.  20, 
1792  ;  IX.  Jared,  b.  June  8,  1794 ;  X.  Rachel,  b.  Sept.  5,  1797. 

33.  Joel,  son  of  Capt.  Abraham,  (23,)  removed  in  1814,  with  his 
family,  to  Susquehanna  Co.,  Pa.,  where  he  resided  until  his  death  in 
1817.  His  sons,  Spencer  and  James  W.,  reside  in  the  same  county 
and  have  children. 

34.  TiMOTEir,  son  of  Capt.  Abraham,  (23,)  ra.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Richard 
Nichols,  May  3,  1781.  She  d.  Jan.  24,  1813.  He  d.  Dec.  8,  1835. 
Ch.  :  I.  Sarah,  b.  June  27,  1782 ;  II.  Elizabeth,  b.  Aug.  11,  1783  ;  III. 
Polly,  b.  Nov.  13,  1784;  IV.  Abraham,  b.  May  23,  1786  ;  V.  Huldah, 
b.  Aug.  4,  1787,  ra.  James  Chatfield;  VI.  Leonard,  b.  Sept.  15,  1788  ; 
VIL  Laura,  b.  Oct.  1,  1790;  VIII.  Palmyra,  b.  Jan.  1,  1792  ;  IX.  Nan- 
cy, b.  Feb.  23,  1793,  d.  1801  ;  X.  Lydia,  b.  Dec.  17,  1794;  XL  Chloe, 
b.  June  13,  1797,  ra.  Jacob  Tallniadge,  d.  1848  ;  XIL  Sherraan,  b.  Sept. 
29,  1798,  m.  Sally  Camp,  April  22,  1824;  XIIL  Vina,  b.  June  30, 
1800,  d.  1822;  XIV.  Nancy,  b.  Feb.  8,  1802  ;  XV.  William,  b.  Sept. 
12,  1803. 

35.  Abraham,  son  of  Capt.  Abraham,  (23,)  m.  Tamer,  dau.  of  Jabez 
Tuttle,  F'eb.  24,  1784.  Ch. :  I.  Ruth,  b.  Nov.  9,  1785;  IL  "Oraiena," 
b.  Nov.  11,  1788— probably  others. 

36.  Preserved,  son  of  Capt.  Abraham,  (23,)  m.  Rachel,  dau.  of  Capt. 
Hezekiah  Brown,  Oct.  3,  1786.  Ch. :  L  Samuel,  b.  March  8,  1787  ;  II. 
Sally  M.,  b.  May  17,  1789— probably  others. 

37.  John,  son  of  John,  (24,)  m.  Lydia,  dau.  of  Moses  Cook,  ]\Iay  1, 
1786.  Ch. :  L  Carlos  V.,  b.  Feb.  9,  1787,  d.  Aug.  4,  1787  ;  II.  Alonzo 
G.,  b.  July  22,  1788;  IIL  Sidney,  b.  July  17,  1790,  d.  1791  ;  IV.  Sid- 
ney, b.  Aug.  3,  1792,  d.  1794;  V.  Asa  Wra.  Warner,  b.  April  1,  1795  ; 
VI.  Carlos  V.,  b.  Sept.  30,  1797. 

38.  John  H.,  son  of  Jesse,  (29,)  m.  Mary  Lockwood,  who  was  b. 
Sept.  28,  1795.  He  resided  in  Western  New  York.  About  1823,  he 
removed  to  Union  Co.,  Pa.,  in  1828  to  Lewiston,  in  1836  to  Chambers- 
burg,  and  in  1839  to  Harrisburg.  He  was  run  over  by  cars  on  the 
Cumberland  Valley  Railroad,  at  Harrisburg,  and  d.  Jan.  14,  1841.  His 
ch.  were  as  follows:  I.  W^ilHam  O.,  b.  Oct.  6,  1815,  m.  Caroline  L. 
Ilutter  of  Allentown,  Pa.,  Sept.  10,  1840.  She  was  dau.  of  Charles  L. 
Hutter,  and  was  b.  Dec.  26,  1818.  The  ch.  of  William  O.  are,  Alice 
M.,  b.  June   25,1841;  Edwin   H.,  b.  Nov.   14,  1814;  William   O.,  b. 


502  HISTOEY    OF   WATERBURY. 

Feb.  12,  1849,  and  Caroline,  b.  March  29,  1852.  11.  Henry  C,  b.  April 
26,  1818,  m.  Margaret  Parke  of  Susquehanna  Co.,  Pa.,  Nov.  17,  1841. 
His  eh.  are,  Theodore  C,  b.  Aug.  20,  1846,  and  Josephine  C,  b.  Sept.  19, 
1848;  m.  Charles  N.,  b.  May  1,  1821,  resides  at  Bedford,  Pa.,  is  a 
dentist;  IV.  Elizabeth  S.,  b.  June  5,  1825,  m.  Jacob  Mann,  and  resides 
in  Fulton  Co.,  Pa. 

HOPKINS. 

1.  John  IIopkixs,  of  Hartford,  had  ch.,  Stephen  and  Bethia.  (See 
p.  151.) 

2.  Stephen,  son  of  John,  (1,)  had  John,  Stephen,  Ebenezer,  Joseph, 
Dorcas  and  Mary. 

3.  John,  son  of  Stephen,  (2,)  had  John,  Consider,  Stephen,  Timothy, 
Samuel,  Mary,  Hannah  and  Dorcas. 

4.  Stephen,  son  of  Stephen,  (2,)  lived  at  Hartford.  Ch. :  Sarah, 
bap.  Aug.  21,  1687  ;  Rachel,  b.  1789  ;  Thomas,  b.  1792,  and  others. 

6.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Stephen,  (2.)  resided  at  Hartford.  Ch. :  I.  Ebe- 
nezer, bap.  Nov.  19,  1693,  d.  young  ;  II.  Jonathan,  bap.  June  28,  1696  ; 
HI.  Ebenezer,  b.  June  25,  1700;  IV.  Mar}^,  b.  Jan.  30,  1705  ;  V.  Ste- 
phen, b.  Aug.  8,  1707,  settled  in  Waterbury;  VI.  Isaac,  b.  Nov.  28, 
1708,  settled  in  Waterbury  ;  VII.  Sarah,  b.  June  25, 1710. 

6.  Joseph,  son  of  Stephen,  (2,)  had  ch.:  I.  Mary,  bap.  March  10, 
1700;  II.  Hannah,  b.  1702;  HI.  Dorcas,  b.  March  18,  1704;  m.  Tim- 
othy Bronson;  IV.  Ruth,  b.  Nov.  9,  1707;  V.  Joseph,  b.  Jan.  14, 
1711. 

7.  Stephen,  son  of  John,  (3,)  settled  in  Waterbury,  m.  Susanna,  dau. 
of  John  Peck  of  Wallingford,  in  1 71 7.  She  d.  Dec.  2,  1755,  and  he  nV. 
2d,  Abigail,  wid.  of  John  Webster  of  Farmington,  May  25,  1726,  and 
d.  Jan.  4,  1769.  Ch. :  I.  John,  b.  July  20,  1718  ;  II.  Stephen,  b.  June 
28,  1721 ;  HI.  Anna,  b.  Sept.  25,  1723,  m.  Thomas  Bronson  ;  IV.  Su- 
sanna, b.  Nov.  10,  1725,  d.  1748;  V.  Mary,  b.  June  4,  1728,  d.  1735  ; 
VI.  Joseph,  b.  June  6, 1730  ;  VII.  Jesse,  b.  Feb.  12,  1733,  d.  1754  ;  VIH. 
Mary,  b.  Nov.  26,  1735,  d.  1748  ;  IX.  Lois,  b.  June  22,  1738,  m.  Isaac 
Johnson  of  Derby  ;  X.  David,  b.  Oct.  14,  1741,  d.  1748. 

8.  Timothy,  son  of  John,  (3,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Thos.  Judd,  June 
•25,  1719,  and  d.  Feb.  5,  1748-9.  Ch. :  I.  Samuel,  b.  Sept.  17, 
1721,  (see  p.  399  ;)  II.  Timothy,  b.  Sept.  8,  1723,  m.  Jan.  14,  1741-2, 
Jemima,  dau.  of  Abraham  Scovill  of  Simsbury ;  HI.  Iluldah,  b.  Dec. 
22,  1725,  m.  Abijah  Richards;  IV.  Hannah,  b.  April  11,  1728,  m. 
Thos.  Upson  ;  V.  Sarah,  b.  May  25,  1730,  m.  Timothy  Clark  ;  VI.  James, 
b.  June   26,  1732,  d.  July  4,  1754  ;  VII.  Daniel,  b.  Oct.  16,  1736,  (see 


APPENDIX.  503 

p.  408;)  Vni.  Mary,  b.  June  27,  1737,  m.  Jolin  Cosset;  IX.  Mark,  b. 
Sept.  18,  1739.    (See  p.  410.) 

9.  Stephen,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (5,)  settled  in  Waterbury,  m.  Jemima, 
dau.  of  John  Bronson,  Feb.  26,  1729-30.  Ch. :  I.  Noah,  b.  Jan.  26, 
1730-31;  II.  Roswell,  b.  May  18,1733;  III.  Micali,  b.  March  9, 
1734-5. 

10.  Isaac,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (5,)  lived  in  Waterbury,  (Wolcott,)  m. 
Mary,  dau.  of  Thomas  Hickox,  Sept.  21,  1732.  She  d.  May  27,  1790.  Mr. 
Hopkins  d.  Jan.  13, 1805.  Ch. :  I.  Obedience,  b.  Sept.  1, 1733,  d.  1736; 
11.  Simeon,  b.  April  30, 1735,  d.  1736  ;  III.  Bede,  b.  Nov.  21,  1737,  m. 
Samuel  Judd  ;  IV.  Simeon,  b.  Nov.  19, 1740  ;  V.  Irene,  b.  1742-3  ;  VI. 
Ruth,  b.  Dec.  26,  1745,  d.  1752 ;  VII.  Ore,  b.  June  18,  1748,  d.  1749  ; 
VIII.  Mittee,  b.  Dec.  14,  1750,  d.  Nov,  1806  ;  IX.  Mary,  b.  Dec.  4, 
1753  ;  X.  Welthe,  b.  June  2,  1756 ;  XI.  Ruth,  b.  Dec.  10, 1759,  m.  1st, 
Ziba  Norton,  2d,  Thos.  Welton. 

11.  John,  son  of  Stephen,  (7,)  lived  in  Waterbury,  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of 
Benajah  Johnson  of  Derby,  Dec.  13,  1749.  She  d.  and  he  m.  2d,  Pa- 
tience  ,  who  d.  July  23,  1802.      He  d.  May  12,  1802.     Ch. :  I. 

Sarah,  b.  Oct.  1,  1750,  m.  Stephen  Culver;  II.  Susanna,  b.  Sept.  26, 
1752,  d.  1776  ;  HI.  and  IV.  Mary  and  Mabel,  b.  Nov.  25,  1755,  Mary 

m.  Eli  Curtiss,  an  attorney,  Mabel  ra.  Rev. Camp ;    V.  Lois,  b. 

Nov.  13,  1757,  m.  John  Hotchkiss;  VI.  David,  b.  Aug.  24,  1762,  m. 
Mary,  dau.  of  Jonathan  Thompson  of  West  Haven,  July  4,  1791.  He, 
David,  is  father  of  David  Hopkins,  Esq.,  and  grandfather  of  Enos  Hop- 
kins, both  of  Naugatuck.  VII.  Rhoda,  b.  Sept.  29,  1767,  m.  Frederick 
Hotchkiss  of  Prospect,  and  went  West;  VIH.  Patience,  b.  July  22, 
1709,  d.  1770;  IX.  John,  b.  1770,  d.  1771  ;  X.  Patience,  b.  Dec.  10, 
1774,  d.  unm.;  Xl.  Susanna,  b.  May  19,1780,  d.  Oct.  1780;  XII. 
John,  b.  Feb.  19,  1782,  d.  young. 

12.  Stephen,  son  of  Stephen,  (7,)  lived  in  Waterbury;  m.  Patience, 
dau.  of  Daac  Bronson,  Oct.  11,  1744.  She  d.  June  3,  1746,  and  he 
m.  Dorothy,  dau.  of  James  Talmage  of  New  Haven,  Nov.  16,  1747. 
She  d.  Oct.  22,  1761.  Ch. :  I.  Anne,  b.  Oct.  1,  1744  ;  II.  Samuel,  b. 
Nov.  21,  1748,  m.  Molly,  dau.  of  David  Miles  of  Wallingford,  June  27, 
1771 ;  had  a  son,  Samuel  Miles,  (see  p.  416;)  HI.  Samuel,  b.  June  19, 
1750,  d.  April  14,  1801 ;  IV.  Stephen,  b.  April  22,  1754,  d.  1782  ;  V. 
Hannah,  b.  Sept.  23,  1757;  VI.  Esther,  b.  Aug.  29,  1760,  d.  Nov. 
4,  1761. 

13.  Joseph,  son  of  Stephen,  (7,)  m.  Ilepzibah,  dau.  of  Thos.  Clark, 
Nov.  28,  1754.  She  d.  July  29, 1800.  He  d.  1801,  (see  p.  411.)  Ch. : 
I.  Livia,  b,  Aug.  27,  1755,  m.  Benoni  Upson,  D.  D.,  (see  p.  443  ;)    I. 


504  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBrKY, 

Asa,  b.  Sept.  1,  1757;  III.  Joseph,  b.  Jan.  9,  1760,  removed  to  Rut- 
land, N.  Y. ;  IV.  Daniel,  b.  April  8,  1762,  settled  in  Hartford;  V- 
Esther,  b.  Feb.  25,  1764,  m.  Mark  Eronson  ;  VI.  Jesse,  b.  May  20, 
1766  ;  VII.  Hepzibah,  b.  May  14,  1768,  m.  Ethel  Eronson;  VIII.  Han- 
nah, b.  May  31,  1770,  m.  Stiles  Thompson  of  Middlebury  ;  IX.  Sally,  b. 
Nov.  17,  1772,  d.  at  Hudson,  N.  Y.,  unm. 

14.  Makk,  son  of  Timothy,  (8  )  ra.  Electa,  dau.  of  Rev.  John  Sar- 
g-eant  of  Stockbridge,  Jan.  31,  1765,  (see  p.  410.)  Ch. :  I.  Archibald, 
b.  March  25,  1766  ;  11.  Henry,  b.  Dec.  28, 1767,  d.  in  1788,  unm. ;  III. 
Sewall,  b.  July  27,  1769 — had  one  son  and  five  daus. ;  IV.  John  Sar- 
geant,  b.  Aug.  27,  1771— had  ch. ;  V.  Louisa,  b.  July  17,  1774;  VI. 
Effingham,  b.  1776,  d.  early. 

15.  Simeon,  son  of  Isaac,  (10,)  lived  in  Waterbury,  m.  Lois.  dau.  of 
Obadiah  Richards,  Nov.  15,  1764,  and  d.  May  4,  1793.  Ch. :  I.  Han- 
nah, b.  Aug.  5,  1765  ;  II.  Sarah,  b.  June  2,  1767  ;  III.  Electa,  b.  July 
8,  1770  ;  IV.  Isaac,  b.  Jan.  11,  1773  ;  V.  Lois,  b.  July  21,  1775  ;  VL 
Richards  Obadiah,  b.  Jan.  II,  1778  ;  VIL  Polly,  b.  Sept.  19, 1779;  YIH. 
Harvey,  b.  June  9,  1782. 

16.  Asa,  son  of  Josepli,  (13,)  removed  from  Waterbury  to  Hartford. 
He  m.  Rebecca,  dau.  of  Benjamin  Payne,  Dec.  1,  1784.  She  d.  Sept. 
17,  1791,  and  he  m.  Abigail,  dau.  of  Peter  Eeiiham  of  Welhersfield, 
Oct.  16,  1793,  and  d.  Dec.  4,  1805.  Ch. :  I.  Catharine  Payne,  b.  Oct. 
24,  1785;  H.  Amelia,  b.  Jan.  4,  1787  ;  IIL  Maria,  b.  Oct.  16,  1790; 
IV.  Henry,  b.  Sept.  3,  1794  ;  V.  Rev.  Asa  T.Hopkins,  D.  D.,  first  settled 
at  Pawtucket,  R.  I.,  afterwards  pastor  of  the  Eleeker  st.  Church,  Utica, 
N.  Y.,  and  still  later,  of  the  First  Presbyterian  church,  Euftalo,  N.  Y., 
where  he  d.  Nov.  27,  1847. 

17.  Joseph,  son  of  Joseph,  (13,)  m.  Ruth,  dau.  of  Abijah  Gilbert  of 
Salem,  N.  Y.,  Jan.  22,  1784.  He  settled  in  Waterbury,  removed  thence 
to  Rutland,  Jefferson  Co.,  N.  Y.  Ch. :  L  Anna,  b.  March  9,  1786  ;  IL 
Gilbert,  b.  Dec.  1787  ;  HI.  Rebecca,  b.  March  21,1790  ;  IV.  Sophia,  b. 
Dec.  26,  1791;  V.  Jesse,  b.  Feb.  23,  1794,  d.  1818;  VL  Joseph,  b. 
Oct.  26,  1796  ;  VIL  Eliza,  b.  Dec.  2,  1798  VIII.  Henry,  b.  Feb.  10, 
1803  (?)  IX.  Mary  Ann,  b.  March,  1806  (?)  X.  Emily,  b.  April,  1808. 

18.  Jesse,  son  of  Joseph,  (13,)  m.  Betsey  Goodwin  of  Hartford,  Dec. 
3,  1794.  She  d.  Feb.  14,  1799.  Ch. :  L  Betsey,  b.  Dec.  8,  1795  ;  IL 
Sally  G.,  Sept.  13,  1798,  (see  p.  412.) 

19.  Anne,  dau.  of  Joseph,  (17,)  m.  Josiah  Tyler  of  Rutland,  N.  Y. 
Ch. :  Jessie  Hopkins  and  Josiah  Bennet. 

20.  Gilbert,  son  of  Joseph,  (17,)  m.  Betsey  Sherman  of  Rutland, 
N.  Y.     Ch. :  Ann,  Gustavus,  Maria,  Samuel,  George,  Morris  and  Jane. 


APPENDIX.  505 

21.  Rebecca,  dau.  of  Joseph,  (lY,)  ra.  Abel  Doolittle.  Ch.:  \Yilliam, 
Eliza,  Henry  and  Justus. 

22.  Sophia,  dau.  of  Joseph,  (17,)  m.  William  Sill  of  Rodman,  N.  Y. 
Ch. :  Mary,  John  Sterling,  Edward  and  Elizabeth. 

23.  Joseph,  son  of  Joseph,  (IV,)  m.  Pamelia  Picket  of  Gouverneur, 
N.  Y.     Ch. :  Bower,  Sara,  Emily,  Brayton  and  others. 

24.  Eliza,   dau.  of  Joseph,  (17,)  m.  Rev. Banks,  and   after- 

■vvards,  Mr.  Holgate  of  Utica,  N.  Y.     Ch. :  Jane,  Frances,  Asa  Hopkins 
and  Arbella  Eliza. 

25.  Henry,  son  of  Joseph,  (17,)  m.  Celestia,  dau.  of  Dea.  David 
Tyler  of  Rutland,  N.  Y.,  in  1829.  Ch.  :  Charles,  Catharine,  Martha, 
Mary  Ann  and  Henry  Tyler. 

26.  Mary  Ann,  dau.  of  Joseph,  (17,)  m.  George  M.  Foster,  Esq.  of 
Ogdeusburg,  N.  Y"".     Ch. :  none. 

27.  Emily,  dau.  of  Joseph,  (17,)  m.  Israel  Lamb,  Esq.  of  Ogdensburg, 
N.  Y.     Ch.:  Frances,  George  and  two  others. 

HOTCHKISS. 

1.  Samuel  Hotchkiss,  (probably  from  Essex,  England,  and  traditional 
brother  of  John  of  Guilford,  Conn.,  whose  name  was  written  Hodgke, 
Hodgkin,  Hotchkin,  &c.,)  was  at  New  Haven  as  early  as  1641.  In  Aug. 
1642,  he  m.  Elizabeth  Cleverly,  and  d.  Dec.  28,  J  663,  leaving  children 
as  follows:  I.  John,  b.  1643,  remained  at  New  Haven,  and  m.  Eliza- 
beth, dau.  of  Henry  Peck,  Dec.  4,  1672.  His  descendants  are  numer- 
ous, and  found  in  many  parts  of  the  country.  He  had  a  son,  Capt.  John, 
who  m.  Mary  Chatterton  at  New  Haven,  in  1694,  and  settled  early  at 
Cheshire,  who  had  a  son  John,  b.  in  1694.  The  last  named  John 
had  Jason,  b.  in  1719,  who  was  father  of  Sarah,  who  m.  William  Law, 
and  became  the  mother  of  Jonathan  Law,  Esq.,  now  of  Cheshire  ;  II. 
Samuel,  b.  1645,  m.  Sarah  Tallmage,  in  1678,  settled  at  East  Haven, 
and  d.  in  1705.  He  Lad,  Mary,  Sarah,  Samuel,  James  and  Abigail. 
III.  James,  b.  1647,  probably  d.  without  issue  ;  IV.  Joshua,  b.  Sept.  16, 
1751,  lived  at  New  Haven;  V.  Thomas,  b.  Dec.  1654,  m.  Sarah  Wil- 
mot,  Nov.  28,  1677,  and  d.  1711.  He  had  ch.,  among  whom  were, 
Samuel,  Anna  and  Sarah  ;  YL  Daniel,  b.  June  8,  1657,  m.  Esther 
Sperry,  June  20,  1683,  and  d.  in  1712.  He  had,  Eliza,  Daniel,  Oba- 
diah,  Rebecca  and  others. 

2.  Ens.  Joshua,  son  of  Samuel,  (1,)  was  married  twice  or  oftener. 
He  was  a  leading  man  at  New  Haven.  Ch. :  I.  Mary,  b.  April  30, 1679  ; 
II.  Dea.  Stephen,  b.  Aug.  12,  1681,  settled  at  Cheshire;  HL  Martha,  b. 
Dec.  14,  1683,  m.  Thomas  Brooks  of  New  Haven,  in  1702,  who  settled 
at  Cheshire,  and  is  the  ].rogenitor  of  most  of  the  name  now  rasiding  in 


506 


HISTOKY   OF   WATEEBUKT. 


the  last  mentioned  place ;  IV.  Priscilla,  d.  1688;  V.  Abraham,  settled 
at  Bethany,  had  three  daughters  ;  VI.  Desire,  d.  in  1*702;  VII.  Isaac, 
b.  June,  1701,  settled  at  Bethany,  and  had  a  large  family,  among  whom 
were,  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob;  VIII.  Jacob,  b.  Feb.  7,  1704,  settled 
on  the  old  homestead,  at  New  Haven,  but  afterwards  removed  to  Ham- 
den,  and  had  ch.  Some  cf  his  sons  remained  at  Hamden.  One  of 
them  removed  to  Derby. 

3.  Dea.  Stephen,  son  of  Ens.  Joshua,  (2,)  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  John 
Sperry,  at  New  Haven,  Dec.  12, 1704.  He  bought  lands  at  Cheshire, 
in  1706,  and  removed  thither  the  next  year.  His  ch.  were,  I.  Joshua, 
b.  Aug.  26,  1705  ;  H.  Elizabeth,  b.  1706,  d.  young;  III.  Mary,  b.  Jan. 
1,  1708,  m.  Nathan  Barnes  ;  IV.  Hannah,  b.  Jan.  10,  1710,  m.  Stephen 
Atwater  ;  V.  Elizabeth,  b.  Feb.  18,  1712  ;  VI.  Dea.  Gideon,  b.  Dec.  5, 
1716,  and  settled  inWaterbury;  VII.  Stephen,  b.  Dec.  1,  1718,  ra. 
Thankful  Cook,  and  had,  Esther,  Thankful,  Susanna  and  Stephen  ;  VIII. 
Silas,  b.  Nov.  22,  1719,  m.  wid.  Olcott;  IX.  Hannah,  b.  Feb.  23,  1722  ; 
X.  Bathshua,  b.  Sept.  1,  1726,  m.  Ralph  Lines;  XL  Benjamin,  b.  Feb. 
1,  1728,  m.  Elizabeth  Roberts;  XIL  Noah,  b.  Nov.  24,  1736,  d.  Jan. 
13.  1760. 

4.  Dea.  Gideon,  son  of  Stephen,  (3,)  ra.  Anna  Brocket,  June  18, 
1737,  who  d.  and  he  m.  2d,  Mabel,  dau.  of  Isaac  Stiles  of  Southbury. 
He  settled  in  the  southeast  part  of  Waterbury,  about  1736,  and  when 
the  society  of  Salem  was  organized  he  was  made  a  deacon  of  the 
church.  He  was  one  of  the  founders  and  active  supporters  of  the 
cburch  and  society  of  Columbia,  (now  Prospect,)  was  a  leading  man  in 
the  town,  and  served  in  both  the  French  and  Revolutionary  wars.  He 
d.  Sept.  3,  1807,  having  lived  to  see  105  grand  ch.,  155  great  grand  ch.,' 
and  four  of  the  fifth  generation.    Ch. :  I.,  Jesse,  b.  1738;  II.  David,  b. 

April  5, 1740,  ra. Williams  ;  IIL  Abraham,  d.  1742  ;  IV.  Abraham, 

b.  1743,  d.  Oct.  29,  1806  ;  V.  Gideon,  b.  Dec.  1744,  ra.  and  had  ch., 
among  whom  was  Jesse,  who  m.  Elizabeth  King.  Both  he  and  his  wife 
d.  in  1833,  of  the  cholera.  They  had  a  son,  Geo.  A.,  who  now  resides 
in  Indiana.  VL  Hudlah,  b.  June  27,  1747,  m.  Josiah  Paine;  VII. 
Anna,  b.  Oct.  22,  1749,  m.  Reuben  Williams  ;  VIII.  Amos,  b.  Nov.  24, 
1751  ;  IX.  Submit,  b.  June  2,  1753, m.  David  Paine;  X.  Titus,  b.  June 
26,  1755,  ra.  Rachel  Guernsey;  XL  Eben,  b.  Dec.  13,  1757,  m.  Mary, 
dau.  of  Gideon  Sanford  of  Cheshire,  Feb.  15,  1781,  and  had  ch.,  among 
whom  was  Gideon  Mills,  now  living  in  Prospect,  on  or  near  the  old 
homestead;  XIL  Asahel,  b.  Feb.  15,  1760;  XIIL  Benoni,  "died 
before  born,  July  27,  1762  ;"  XIV.  Mabel,  b.  May  23,  1764,  m.  Chaun- 
cey  Judd,  and  d.  May  5,  1797;  XV.  Phebe,  b.  Aug.  3,  1765,  m.  Reu- 
ben Williams,  and  d.  1789;  XVI.  Stiles,  b.  Jan.  31,   1768,  m.  Polly 


APPENDIX.  507 

Ilorton,  and  had  Amanda,  Sherman,  Demas,  Marshall,  and  a  dau.  who 
d.  young.  He  lived  in  Prospect;  XVIL  Olive,  b.  Nov.  21,  17G9,  m. 
William  Jones;  XVIII.  Melliscent,  b.  May  16,  1771,  m.  David  San- 
ford  ;   XIX.  Amzi,  b.  July  3,  1774,  resides  in  Meriden. 

5.  Jesse,  son  of  Dea.  Gideon,  (4,)  m.  a  dau.  of  Peter  Mallory  of 
Stratford,  Oct.  2,  1759,  and  d.  in  the  army,  Sept.  29,  1776.  lie  had, 
I.  Asahel,  b.  1760;  II.  Charity,  b.  1761;  III.  Bulah,  b.  17G2;  IV. 
Gabril,    b.    1763;    V.  Rebecca,  b.  1765;    VI.  Temperance,  b.    1767; 

VII. b.   1768;  VIII.  Chloe,  b.    1771  ;  IX.  Anna,  b.  1772;  X. 

Huldah,  b.  1774  ;  XL  Jesse,  b.  1776. 

6.  David,  son  of  Dea.  Gideon,  (4,)  m.  Abigail  Douglas  of  Meriden, 

Nov.  21,  1763,  who  d.  April  5,  1775,  and  he  m.  2d, Todd,  July  5, 

1775;  Ch.:  I.  Aseneth,  b.  1764;  II.  Sarah,  b.  1766;  III.  Fred- 
erick, b.  1768 ;  IV.  Levina,  b.  1770 ;  V.  Amraphel,  b.  1772  ;  VI.  Cyrus, 
b.  1774;  VII.  Charles  Todd,  b.  1776  ;  VIII.  Abigail,  b.  1778;  IX.  Gil- 
lard,  b.  1780  ;  X.  Peninah,  b.  1783. 

7.  Abraham,  son  of  Dea.  Gideon,  (4,)  lived  in  Watertown,  m,  Sarah, 
dau.  of  John  Weed,  Dec.  28,  1767,  and  d.Oct.  29,  1806.  Ch.:  I.  John, 
b.  1768  ;  II.  Ezra,  b.  1772  ;  III.  Lois,  b.  1773  ;  IV.  Uannah,  b.  1775  ; 
V.  Joel,  b.  1781 ;  VL  Benjamin,  b.  1786. 

8.  Amos,  son  of  Dea.  Gideon,  (4.)  m.  Abigail,  dau.  of  Ephraim  Scott, 
Dec.  24,  1772.  Ch.:  L  Woodward,  b.  Oct.  19,  1773  ;  IL  Sabra,  b.  July 
19,  1777;  IIL  Avera,  b.  April  5,  1779;  IV.  Molly,  b.  Feb.  9,  1783; 
V.  Orel,  b.  April  11,  1785,  d.  1789  ;  VL  Amos  IL,  b.  Feb.  18,  1788  ; 
VIL  Orren,  b.  April  1,  1792,  settled  in  Naugatuck  ;  VIIL  Abigail  O., 
b.  Sept.  10,  1779,  d.  1804. 

9.  Asahel,  son  of  Dea.  Gideon,  (4,)  m.  Sarah  Williams,  March  22, 
1781,  who  d.  in  1794,  and  he  m.  2d,  Phebe  Merriam  of  Cheshire,  June 
7,  1794;  Ch. :  L  Sally,  b.  1781;  IL  Curtiss,  b.  1783;  IIL  Dyer,  b. 
1785,  has  a  family,  lives  in  Naugatuck;  IV.  Esther,  b.  1788;  V.  Tem- 
perance,   b.    1797,  ra. Andrews,  resides   in    Sharon,  Conn.;  VI. 

Asahel  A.,  b.  1799,  resides  in  Sharon,  has  a  family;  VIL  Marcus,  b. 
1801,  lives  in  Naugatuck,  has  a  family;  VIIL  Phebe  Maria,  b.  1S05. 

10.  Woodward,  son  of  Amos,  (8,)  m.  Polly,  dau.  of  Capt.  Phineas 
Castle,  April  2,  1797.  They  are  both  living  and  reside  in  Prospect. 
Ch.  :  I.  Castle,  b.  May  10,  1798,  m.  Artemesia  Stillman  of  Burlington, 
Conn.,  and  removed  to  Ohio;  IL  Wm.,  b.  Aug.  1800,  m.  Elizabeth 
Thorndike  of  Va.— settled  in  Ohio,  and  d.  in  March,  1842  ;  III.  Rhoda, 
b.  Jan.  25,  1803,  m.  F.  M.  Benham  and  removed  to  Ohio;  IV.  Polly, 
b.  July  3,  1805,  m.  Ilervey  Norton  and  settled  in  Western  N.  Y. ;  V. 
Julius,  b.  July  11,  1810,  ra.  Melissa,  dau.  of  Enoch  Perkins  of  Oxford, 


508  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUKY. 

Conn.,  April  29,  1832,  and  at  present  resides  in  Middletown.  He  was 
the  first  mayor  of  the  city  of  Waterbury ;  VI.  Albert,  b.  April  10, 
1813,  ra.  Abbey  Benio  of  Middletown,  and  d.  Jan.  22,  1844;  VII. 
Sarah  C,  b.  Sept.  8,  1818,  and  d.  Nov.  1848. 

JUDD. 

1.  Dea.  Thomas  Judd*  of  Farmington  had  ch.,  Elizabeth,  William, 
Thomas,  John,  Benjamin,  Mary,  Rulh,  Philip  and   Samuel. 

2.  William,  son  of  Dea.  Thomas,  (1,)  had,  Mary,  Thomas,  John, 
Rachel,  Samuel,  Daniel  and  Elizabeth. 

3.  Lieut.  Thomas,  son  of  Dea.  Thomas,  (1,)  had,  Thoma*,  John  and 
Sarah. 

3.  Dea.  Thomas,  son  of  William,  (2)  had,  William,  Martha,  Rachel, 
Sarah,  Hannah,  Mary,  Elizabeth,  Ruth  and  Stephen. 

5.  Thomas,  son  of  Lieut.  Thomas,  (3,)  had,  Thomas,  Joseph,  Sarah, 
Elizabeth,  Joannah,  Joseph,  Ebenezer,  Mary,  Rachel  and  Abigail. 

6.  John,  son  of  Lieut.  Thomas,  (3.)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Serg.  Samuel 
Hickox,  April  16,  1696,  and  d.  in  1717.  His  wid.  d.  July  17,  1750. 
Ch.:  L  Hannah,  b.  Feb.  2,  1697, d.  March  12,  1713;  H.  John,  b.  June 
28,  1699;  IH.  Samuel,  b.  Nov.  6,  1703;  IV.  Thomas,  b.  Jan.  10, 
1705,  d.  1706;  V.  Thomas,  b.  July  10,  1707;  VL  Benjamin,  b.  Aug. 

28,  1710;    VIL  Ebenezer,  b.  1713. 

7.  Capt.  William,  son  of  Dea.  Thomas,  (4.)  m.  Mary  Root,  and  d.  Jan. 

29,  1772.  Ch.:  I.Timothy,  b.  Dec.  28,  1713  ;  II.  Stephen,  b.  Aug.  17, 
1715;  IH.  Hannah,  b.  Sept.  12,  1717,  d.  unm. ;  'V.  Jonathan,  b.  Oct.  4, 
1719,  (seep.  421;)  V.  A  dau.,  d.  without  a  name  ;  VI.  Elnathan,b.  Aug.  7, 

1724  ;  VL  Mary,  b.  Nov.  22,  1727,  m.  1st,  Thomas  Richard.s,  2d, 

Hiirlbut;  VIIL  William,  b.  Jan.  12,  1729-30;  IX.  Sarah,  b.  Nov.  30, 
1732,  m.  Benjamin  Richards. 

8.  Joseph,  son  of  Thomas,  (5,)  returned  from  Kensington  and  set- 
tled in  present  Naugatuck.  He  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Robert  Royce  of 
Wallingford,  Nov.  10,  1726,  and  d.  Feb.  16,  1750.  His  wid.  d.  May 
14,  1770.  Ch.:  L  Isaac,  b.  Nov.  18,  1727;  H.  Phebe,  b.  May  10, 
1729;  HI.  Elizabeth,  b.  April  7,  1732,  m.  Abner  Lewis,  and  lived  in 
Sandersfield,  Mass. ;  IV.  Lois,  b.  Jan.  9,  1735,  d.  1750;  V.  Ebenezer,  b. 
Nov.  23,  1737;  VL  Ruth,  b.  May  23,  1740,  m.  Abraham  Lewis:  VII. 
Abigail,  b.  June  23,  1742-3,  d.  1750. 

9.  Lieut.  John,  son  of  John,  (6,)  m.  Mercy,  dau.  of  Samuel  Bronson 

*  For  a  full  account  of  the  three  first  generations  of  this  family,  see  p.  155  of  this  work.  The 
reader  is  also  referred  to  an  extended  genealogy  by  Sylvester  Judd,  Esq.,  of  Northampton, 
Mass. 


APPENDIX.  509 

of  Kensington,  Jan.  6,  1731-2.  She  d.  1737.  He  d.  May  11,  1797, 
Ch. :  I.  Jemima,  b.  Nov.  12,  1732,  m.  David  Taylor,  1760,  d.  17G1  ;  II. 
Samuel,  b.  Dec.  26,  1734;  III.  Noah,  b.  Oct.  13,  1737. 

10.  Samuel,  son  of  John,  (6,)  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  David  Scolt,  Jan. 
13,  1730-31;  lived  in  Watertown— d.  Jan.  30,  1793.  Ch. :  I.Asa, 
b.  Sept.  29,  1726;  II.  Esther,  b.  Aug.  11,  1728,  m.  Cyrus  Stovve ;  III. 
Hannah,  b.  Nov.  8,  1731,  m.  David  Garnsey  ;  IV.  John,  b.  Aug.  4, 
1733. 

11.  Thomas,  son  of  John,  (6,)  m.  Ann,  dau.  of  Daniel  Porter,  May 
11,  1732,  and  d.  1739.  His  wid.  m.  James  Nichols.  Ch. :  I.  Michael, 
b.  Sept.  7,  1733,  d.  Oct.  8,  1734;  II.  Michael,  b.  Aug.  24,  1735  ;  III. 
Susanna,  b.  Jan.  23,  1737-8,  m.  Ezra  Bionson,  Esq.,  Sept.  6,  1753. 

12.  Benjamin,  son  of  John,  (6,)  m.  Abigail,  dau.  of  Gilbert  Adams 
of  Simsbury,  Jan.  8,  1738.  She  d.  Nov.  7,  1755.  He  removed  from 
Waterbury  to  Ilarwinton — was  a  physician.  Ch. :  I.  A  dau.,  b.  April 
30,  1739;  II.  Benjamin,  b.  June  6,  1740,  d.  young;  III.  Thomas,  b. 
April  12,  1743  ;  IV.  Annis,  b.  Nov.  25,  1744,  m.  an  Alford ;  V.  Joel, 
b.  July  15,  1748,  m.  Mercy  Hickox  ;  ch.,  1,  Uri ;  2,  Benjamin  H.,  who 
now  lives  in  Watertown;  3,  Randall  ;  4,  Uri ;  5,  Lucy  ;  VI.  Benjamin, 
b.  Jan.  8,  1755. 

13.  EuEXEZER,  son  of  John,  (6,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Joseph  Hawkins  of 
Derby,  Nov.  17,  1742,  and  removed  to  Chiremont,  N.  H.  Ch. :  I. 
Hrewster,  b.  Jan.  12,  1744,  was  in  the  Revolutionary  war,  removed  to 
New  Hampshire;  II.  Enoch,  b.  July  21,  1745,  m.  Iphenia  Warner,  no 
ch. ;  III.  Ebenezer,  b.  May  28,  1747,  went  to  New  Hampshire;  IV. 
Sarah,  b.  Jan.  2, 1749,  d.  1755  ;  V.  David,  b.  Oct.  11, 1750,  d.  unra. ;  VI. 
Benajah,  b.  Sept.  15,  1762,  d.  in  the  Revolutionary  service ;  VII.  Amos, 
b.  Sept.  11,  1755,  no  ch. ;  VIH.  Hawkins,  m.  Annis  Butler;  IX.  Sarah, 
m.  Ephraim  Page  ;  X.  Mary,  m.  Benjamin  Alden  ;  XI.  Hannah. 

14.  Timothy,  Esq.,  son  of  William,  (7,)  graduated  at  Yale  College  in 
1737,  lived  in  Westbury,  was  a  magistrate,  &c.  He  m.  March  29, 
1744,  Mary,  dau.  of  Thomas  Clark.  She  d.  Nov.  8,  1744,  and  he  m. 
Melliscent,  wid.  of  John  Southmayd,  Oct.  9,  1749,  who  d.  March  26, 
1763,  and  he  ra.  3d,  Ann,  wid.  of  Benjamin  Sedgwick,  and  mother  of 
Judge  Theodore  Sedgwick.  He  m.  4th,  Mary,  wid.  of  Samuel  Foote. 
S!ie  d.  Oct.  1782.  Ch. :  I.  Mary,  b.  Nov.  1 1,  1751,  m.  an  Andruss,  and 
lived  in  Binghampton,  N.  Y. ;  II.  Parthenia,  b.  Aug.  6,  1754,  m.  Avery 
Skilton,  March  26,  1771.  He  was  a  son  of  Dr.  Henry  Skilton  from 
England,  and  lived  in  Bethlem  and  Watertown.  She  d.  March  30, 
1829.  HI.  AlK-n  S.,  b.  Oct.  5,  1756,  lived  in  Northfield— removed  to 
Windsor,  N.  Y.— had  eleven  ch.  ;  IV.  Giles,  b.  Oct.  30,  1758,  d.  Sept.  3, 


510  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURT. 

1759  ;  V.  Melliscent,  b.  Aug.  21,  1760,  d.  Aug.  30,  1762  ;  VI.  Timothy, 
b.  Jan.  21,  1763,  d.  May  26,  1763. 

15.  Stephen,  son  of  William,  (7,)  m.  Margary,  dau.  of  Caleb  Clark, 
May  31,  1743.  She  d.  Feb.  11,  1746-7,  and  lie  m.  2d,  Mary,  dau.  of 
Thomas  Wheeler  of  Woodbury,  April  28,  1748,  who  d.  Aug.  11, 
1749.  He  then  m.  Lydia,  dau.  of  Dr.  Ebenezer  Warner  of  Woodbury, 
March  13,  1751.  She  d.  June  2,  1763,  and  he  m.  4th,  Else,  wid.  of 
Phineas  Matthews,  Nov.  10,  1768,  and  d.  Oct.  12,  177 1.  His  fourth 
wife  d.  with  her  son  Erastus  at  Jefferson,  N.  Y.,  Aug.  1799.  Ch. :  I. 
Thomas,  b.  Feb.  9,  1743-4,  removed  to  Harpersfield,  N.  Y. — had  eight 
ch. ;  H.  Lydia,  b.  Sept.  18,  1745,  m.  Justus  Daily;  HI.  Daniel,  b.  May 
9,  1749,  d.  Aug.  1749;  IV.  Daniel,  b.  Jan.  17,  1751-52— was  a  sol- 
dier in  the  expedition  to  Quebec,  where  he  d.  Feb.  2,  1776,  of  small- 
pox ;  V.  Hannah,  b.  Oct.  31, 1753,  m.  Abijah  Baird,  lived  at  Harpersfield  ; 
VI.  Freeman,  b.  Aug.  10, 1755 — was  in  the  expedition  to  Quebec.  He 
d.  at  Lockport,  N.  Y.,  March  5, 1840— had  thirteen  ch. ;  VII.  Stephen,  b- 
May  1,  1757,  settled  in  Harpersfield,  N.  Y. — no  ch.— d.  Jan.  8,  1821  ; 
VIII.  "Margret,"  b.  Jan.  23,  1759,  m.  Noble  Atwood  ;  IX.  Eben  War- 
ner, b.  April  12,  1761,  removed  to  Middlebury,  Vt.,  and  d.  there,  Sept. 
18,  1837— had  four  ch. ;  X.  Erastu?,  b.  June  29,  1771,  m.  Ruth  Hick- 
ox,  and  went  to  Jefferson,  N.  Y.,  where  he  d.  May  22,  1837.  He  had 
nine  ch. 

16.  Elnathan,  son  of  William,  (7,)  m.  Miriam,  dau.  of  Samuel 
Ricliards,  Nov.  28,  1752.  He  lived  in  Westbury,  and  d.  there  Jan. 
3,  1777.  His  wid.  d.  at  Paris,  N.  Y.,  Jan.  12,  1806.  Ch. :  I.  Richard 
Samuel,  b.  Oct.  16,  1753,  d.  in  Clinton,  N.  Y.,  April  6,  1821— left  no 
ch. :  II.  Clarinda,  b.  May  16,  1755,  d.  unm.  Nov.  29,  1804  ;  III.  Sarah, 
b.  Sept.  14,  1757,  d.  unm.,  March,  1790;  IV.  Dotha,  b,  Feb.  26,  1760, 
m.  Maj.  Joseph  Cutler — had  11  ch.  and  d.  at  Buff'alo,  N.  Y.,  Sept.  6, 
1833;  V.  Consider,  b.  June  13,  1762,  d.  next  day;  VI.  Melliscent,  b. 
July  7,  1763,  m.  Samuel  Prentice — went  W^st,  had  5  ch.,  and  d.  Feb. 
23,  1828  ;  VII.  Miriam,  b.  April  12,  1766,  m.  Smith  Arnold.  He  be- 
came a  Methodist  minister  and  lived  in  various  places  in  N.  Y. ;  VIII. 
Elnathan,  b.  Dec,  7,1773,  removed  to  Paris,  N.  Y.,  thence  to  Troy, 
Mich.,  was  a  physician,  and  d.  Sept.  4,  1845. 

17.  William,  son  of  William,  (7,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Isaac  Castle,  Nov. 
2,  1752,  who  d.  March  12,  1777,  and  he  m.  2d,  wid.  Sarah  Green  of 
Stamford,  Oct.  1778.  He  removed  to  Harpersfield,  N.  Y.,  and  thence 
to  Jefferson,  where  he  d.  Nov.  22,  1815.  Ch.:  I.  Demas,  b.  Sept.  10, 
1753,  ni.  Maranali  Garnsey,  removed  to  Jefferson,  N.  Y.,  and  d.  Sept. 
22,   1840— had    14  ch. ;  II.  Balmarine,  b.  Sept.  20,   1755,  m.  Abigail 


APPENDIX.  511 

Thompson,  lived  in  Huntington,  Conn.,  and  d.  May  19,  1840 — bad  10 
cli.;  III.  William,  b.   April  1,  iToS — went  to  Jefferson,  N.  Y.,  d.  Aug. 

24,  1839 — was  a  Revolutionary  pensioner ;  IV.  Mary  Root,  b.  Dec. 
21,  1V59,  m.  Daniel  Garnsey  and  went  to  Harpersfield,  N.  Y. ;  Y. 
"  Luce,"  b.  July  2,  1764,  m.  Isaac  Garnsey — went  to  Harpersfield  ;  YI. 
Shelden,  b.  July  10,  1767,  d.  1768;  YII.  Shelden,  b.  Oct.  17,  1768, 
lived  at  Scipio,  N.  Y.,  and  d.  May  12,  1806— bad  4  ch. ;  VIII. 
"  Perthena,"  b.  Dec.  3,  1771,  unra.  IX.  Marvin,  b.  May  16,  1775, 
settled  in  Jefferson,  N.  Y. — had  1  son. 

18.  Isaac,  son  of  Joseph,  (8,)  m.  Anna,  dau.  of  Daniel  "Williams, 
June  23,  1751-2.  He  lived  at  Judd's  Meadow,  and  d.  June  10,  1808. 
His  wid.  d.  July  1,  1822.  Ch.:  I.  Roswell,  b.  Nov.  6,  1752,  m.  Lois 
Scott,  June  17,  1777.  He  lived  in  Salem  and  had  9  ch. ;  II.  Rosanna, 
b.  Oct.  6,  1754.  m.  1st,  Edward  Perkins,  2d,  James  Brown;  HI.  Isaac, 
b.  Nov.  19,  1756,  m.  Patience  Hammond,  and  settled  in  Woodbridge, 
Conn. — had  7  ch.;  IV.  \Yalter,  b.  Nov.  11,  1758,  m.  Margaret  Terril, 
May  3,  1782,  lived  in  Salem  so3.,  and  d.  April  2,  1833— had  6  ch. ;  Y. 
Apaline,  b.  Jan.  25,  1761,  m.  Elias  Lounsbury  of  Bethany  ;  VI.  Chaun- 
cey,  b.  July  8,  1764,  lived  in  Salem,  was  in  the  Revolutionary  war,  m. 
1st,  Mabel,  dau.  of  Gideon  Hotchkiss,  2d,  Eunice  French — had  10  cli.  ; 
VIL  and  VIH.  Anna  and  Ruth,  b.  July  6,  1767  ;  Anna  d.  in  1773— 
Ruth  m.  Andrew  Smith,  and  had  5  ch. ;  IX.  Milla,  b.  Oct.  1769,  m. 
Isaac  Perkins  of  Bethany;  X.  Reuben,  b.  May  28,  1772,  m.  Dorcas 
Smith,  had  2  ch.  and  d.  at  Bethany,  July  4,  1840;  XL  Asel,  b.  June 
23,  1776,  m.  Polly  Johnson,  and  d.  at  Bethany,  Oct.  13,  1834— had  4 
ch. ;  XII.  Harvey,  b.  Dec.  3,  1778,  lived  in  Salem,  m.  1st,  Jemima 
Hickox,  Dec.  25,  1800,  who  d.  Nov.  1,  1803,  and  he  m.  2d,  Mrs.  Lucy 
Twitchel,  formerly  a  Hinman,  Aug.  12,  1810 — had  7  ch. 

19.  Ebenezeu,  son  of  Joseph,  (8,)  m.  Anna  Charles,  Feb.  7,  1765, 
who  d.  Aug.  10,  1782,  and  he  m.  Betsey,  dau.  of  Nathan  Hill  of 
Cheshire,  Oct.  8,  1782.  He  was  then  residing  in  Goshen.  She  d. 
Nov.  23,  1807,  and  he  m.  3d,  Mary  Hurlbut,  Jan.  28,  1808,  and  remov- 
ed to  Cornwall,  Vt.,  and  thence  to  Onondaga,  N.  Y.     His   wife  d.  June 

25,  1821.  He  d.  Sept.  27,  1823.  Ch. :  L  Charles,  b.  March  2,  1766,  d. 
1779  ;  II.  Abigail,  b.  March  31, 1768,  m.  David  Landon  ;  lived  and  d.  in 
Solon,  N.  Y.;  IIL  Allin,  b.  March  19,  1770,  d.  1772;  lY.  Allin, 
b.  March  9,  1772,  m.  Clarissa  Palmer;  lived  in  Orwell,  Vt.,  and  thence 
removed  to  the  State  of  N.  Y. — was  drowned  about  1817 — left  6  ch.; 
V.  Amzi,  b.  Dec.  21,  1774,  unm. ;  VL  Anna,  b.  March  16,  1777,  m- 
Reuben  Dibble,  and  lived  in  German,  Chenango  Co.,  N.  Y. — both  dead; 
VII.  Asa,  b.  Feb.  11,  1780,  m.  Sarah  Burdick,  lived  in  German,  left  2 


512  HISTOKT    OF    WA.TERBURY. 

daus.;  VIII.  Ambrose,  b.  Aug.  23,  1783,  m.  Nancy  Johnson  of  Soutli- 
bury,  Conn,,  Dec.  16,  1806  ;  resides  at  Marcellus,  N.  Y, — a  deacon — has 
5  ch.;  IX,  Ruth,  b.  Oct.  19,  1785,  m.  Constant  Fenn,  resides  in  Onon- 
daga, N.  Y,;  X,  Esther,  b.  April  19,  1789,  d,  wlien  12  years  old, 

20.  Capt,  Samuel,  son  of  Lieut,  John,  (9,)  m.  Bode,  dau,  of  Isaac 
Hopkins,  March  31,  1763,  She  d,  March  20,  1810.  He  kept  a  public 
house  on  the  north  side  of  West  Main  street  52  years,  and  d.  Sept,  11, 
1825,  Ch. :  I,  Mary,  b,  Feb.  20,  1764,  m,  Timon  Miles  of  Waterbury, 
Aprils,  1785,  d,  June  2,  1845;  II,  Olive,  b.  July  21,  1767,  unm,, 
d.  Nov.  3,  1849  ;  III,  John,  b.  April  11,  1769,  d,  1769;  IV.  Sarah,  b. 
Nov,  18,  1771,  m.  Israel  Holmes  from  Greenwich,  Sept.  9,  1773,  lived 
in  Waterbury  and  d.  March  19,  1821;  V.  Hannah,  b,  June  7,  1774, 
unm,,   resides   on   the   old  homestead;  VI,  Samuel,  b.   June  5,  1777- 

21.  Noah,  son  of  Lieut.  John,  (9,)  m,  Rebecca,  dau.  of  Jonathan 
Prindle,  July  10,  1760.  He  lived  in  Watertown  and  d,  Sept.  3,  1822. 
His  widow  d.  March  19,  1838,  aged  99,  Ch, :  I.  Jemima,  b.  Aug,  10, 
1761,  m.  Samuel  Woodward;  II,  Harvey,  b.  May  5,  1763,  went  to 
Coventry,  N,  Y.,— had  four  ch, ;  IIL  Michael,  b,  Feb.  19,  1765,  went 
to  the  State  of  New  Yt)rk,— had  6  ch, ;  IV.  Eleazar,  b,  Aug.  22,  1769, 
lived  in  Watertown — had  ch. ;  V,  Susannah,  m.  Ebenezer  French,  d. 
Oct.  31,  1832;  VL  Leverett,  b.  about  1774,  m.  Olive  C.  Steel  and  re- 
sided in  Bethlem,  Conn.  He  d,  Dec,  11,  1841.  His  wid.  d.  Feb.  20, 
1848.  Ch,:  Garwood,  has  ch. — resides  in  the  State  of  New  York;  2. 
Anna,  m.  Titus  Pierce  and  resides  in  South  Britain;  3.  Daniel,  resides 
in  the  State  of  New  York ;  4,  Erasmus,  lives  in  Ohio ;  5,  Leverett  P., 
resides  in  Bethlem,  has  ch.  ;  VII,  Bethel,  graduated  at  Yale  College  in 
1797 — long  a  minister  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  He  received  the  de- 
gree of  D,  D,  from  Washington  College  in  1831  ;  VIII.  Hannah,  m- 
Demming;  IX,  Jonathan, — was  an  Episcopal  minister  at  Cam- 
bridge, Md, ;  X,  Elijah,  d,  Dec,  24,  1794,  a,  10  ;  XI.  Hannah,  d.  Nov. 
13,  1833. 

22,  JoHXj  son  of  Samuel,  (10,)  m,  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Ebenezer  Rich- 
ards, April  10,  1755,  and  lived  in  Watertown,  She  d,  March  22,  1779> 
and  he  d.  Dec,  23,  1793.  Ch.  :  I.  Levi,  b.  March  16,  1756,  d.  July  21, 
1756  ;  IL  Levi,  b.  Oct.,  1757,  m.  Eunice  Hubbard  and  had  10  ch.  He 
lived  in  Watertown  and  d.  Nov.  30,  1810;  IIL  Abigail,  b.  July  3^ 
1760,  d,  1760;  IV,  John,  b,  June  27,  1661,  went  West;  V,  Chandler, 
b.  April  3,  1763;  VL  Abigail,  b,  April  7,  1765;  VIL  Susanna,  b, 
March  19,  1769  ;  VIL  Annah,  b.  Sept,  26,  1772  ;  IX,  Esther,  b,  Feb. 
11,1775, 

23,  Asa,  sou  of  Samuel,  (10,)  m,  Melliscent,  dau,  of  Samuel  Silkrigs, 


APPENDIX.  513 

June  27,  1761.  Ch. :  I.  Mercy,  b.  Nov.  29,  1761  ;  II.  Samuel,  b.  Feb. 
28,  1763  ;  III.  Melliscent,  b.  March  29,  1765  ;  IV.  Asa;  V.  Elkanah ; 
VI.  Alpheus. 

24.  RoswELL,  son  of  Isaac,  (18,)  ra.  Lois  Scott,  June  17, 1777.  Cli. : 
I.  Esther,  b.  June  17,  1778,  ra.  Samuel  Peck;  II.  Leava,  b.  Feb.  7, 
1780,  m.  Rev.  Samuel  Potter;  III.  Anna,  b.  Oct.  1,  1782,  m.  Russel 
Chamberlain  of  Kent;  IV.  Tamer,  b.  Sept.  22,  1784,  m.  Ira  Pond  of 
Camden,  N.Y.;  V.  Chloe,  b.  Sept.  1,^1786,  m.  Russel  Chamberlain 
after  the  death  of  Anna  ;  VI.  Roswell  C,  b.  May  20,  1789— went  to 
Illinois;  VII.  Lois  A.,  b.  June  12,  1791,  m.  Baird  Candee  of  Nauga- 
tuck;  VIII.  Laura,  b.  July  30,  1794,  unra.;  IX.  Asahel,  b.  Aug.  15, 
1797,  m.  Polly  Piatt  of  Waterbury. 

25.  Samuel,  son  of  Capt.  Samuel,  (20,)  m.  Cleora,  dau.  of  Benja- 
min Baldwin,  Aug.  30,  1798.  She  d.  Dec.  9,  1809.  He  m.  2d,  Polly, 
dau.  of  Jesse  Beecher  of  Woodbridge,  April  5,  1812,  and  d.  March  19, 
1813,  aged  36.  His  widow  d.  Aug.  30,  1815,  in  her  33d  year.  Ch. : 
I.  Elizabeth  Cook,  b.  Aug.  23,  1800,  m.  James  Morriss  of  Cussewaga, 
Pa.;  n.  Sophia  Hopkins,  b.  Aug.  6,  1805,  d.  Aug.  25,  1815. 

26.  Chandler,  son  of  John,    (22,)  m. Scott,    and    d.  Dec.  21, 

1791.  Ch. :  I.  Harvey,  b.  1787,  left  home  while  young  and  was  never 
heard  of  more;  II.  Sarah,  b.  Oct.  3,  1789,  m.  Ephraim  Nettleton  of 
Waterbury  and  had    2    ch. ;  HI.  Chandler,  (posthumous,)  b.  July  20, 

1792,  m.  Grace  Lum  of  Southbury,  Aug.,  1819,  and  had  3  sons  and  2 
daughters — resides  in  Watertown. 

Stephen  Judd  of  Waterbury,  was  in  West  Hartford,  Aug.,  1751; 
parentage  unknown.  He  m.  Sarah  Russel  of  Wallingford,  Jan.  18, 
1776,  and  d.  July  10,  1820.  Ch. :  L  Thomas,  b.  Oct.  28,  1776,  m.  Bet- 
sey Clark  of  Wallingford,  Oct.,  1800— had  8  ch.— lived  in  Southing- 
ton  ;  II.  Stephen,  b.  Jan.  29, 1780,  m.  Pamela  Stilwell  of  Cairo,  Green 
Co.,  N.  Y.,  and  removed  to  Ohio;  IIL  Elizabeth,  b.  1782,  m.  John 
Tuttle,  d.  at  Waterbury  in  1848;  IV.  Hepzibah,  b.  May  23,  1784,  m. 
Joseph  Root  of  Waterbury;  V.  Jesse,  b.  Oct.  11,  1786, — lives  in 
Greenwood,  Steuben  Co.,  N.  Y.,  where  he  m.  Mary  Stotenburg ;  VI. 
Nabby  Curtis,  b.  April  10,  1791,  m.  Amasa  Roberts  of  Middletown ; 
Vn.  Snlly  Russell,  b.  Nov.  1,  1793,  d.  1794;  VIIL  Sarah  Ann,  b. 
Aug.  18,  1795,  m.  Jesse  Lambert  of  Waterbury;  IX.  Harvey,  b.  Aug. 
25,  1798,  ra.  Sally  Brown,  Dec.  31,  1821,  and  had  Samuel  C.  and 
Harvey.  He  d.  in  Ohio  in  1833  ;  X.  William  Russell,  b.  May  9, 1802, 
married  and  had  ch. — lives  in  Waterbury. 
33 


514  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBrRY. 


KENDRICK. 


John,  the  grandfather  of  Green  Kendrick,  was  a  Virginian,  supposed 
to  be  of  the  second  or  third  generation  from  the  original  ancestor  from 
Massachusetts.  lie  was  a  tobacco  planter,  and  had  four  sons, — John, 
William,  James  and  Benjamin,  and  four  or  five  daughters.  He  was 
born  about  the  year  1Y35,  and  died  in  1810.  John,  his  eldest  son,  the 
father  of  Green,  removed  to  North  Carolina  about  tbe  year  1*786,  and 
was  a  tobacco  planter,  until  the  invention  of  the  cotton  gin,  by  Whit- 
ney, when  he  became  a  cotton  planter.  He  was  a  man  of  ability,  integ- 
rity, and  eminent  usefulness  in  all  matters  pertaining  to  the  church,  the 
State  and  society.  He  was  a  deacon  of  the  Baptist  church,  was  born 
in  1764,  and  d.  1823. 

The  wife  of  the  above  John  Kendrick  was  Martha  Dinldns,  dau.  of 
John  Dinldns,  a  wealthy  planter,  believed  to  have  been  of  Welch  de- 
scent. She  was  b.  in  1765,  and  d.  in  1825  ;  was  a  woman  of  many 
virtues,  fulfilling  the  duties  of  life  with  a  scrupulous  regard  to  the  pre- 
cepts of  the  Bible.  She  was  the  mother  of  eleven  children,  nine  of 
whom  became  heads  of  families.  There  were  eight  sons,  and  three  daus. 
Green  was  the  seventh  child,  and  is  the  only  survivor. 

Green  Kendrick  was  born  in  Mecklenburg  County,  North  Carolina, 
April  1,  1798.  From  seven  to  ten  years  of  age,  he  attended  a  common 
country  school,  to  and  from  which  he  walked  more  than  three  miles, 
night  and  morning.  From  ten  to  nineteen,  he  labored  on  the  planta- 
tion, attending  school  at  such  brief  intervals  as  his  duties  on  the  planta- 
tion would  allow.  For  two  years  during  the  latter  part  of  the  time,  he 
enjoyed  somewhat  better  educational  advantages  than  was  common  for 
the  sons  of  planters  at  that  time.  He  was  very  ambitious,  both  in  his 
labors  in  the  field  and  in  his  studies,  and  thus  accomplished  more  than 
most  others  with  whom  he  was  associated.  His  father  taught  him  in- 
dustry and  necessity  made  him  frugal.  At  the  age  of  nineteen,  after 
teaching  a  common  school  nine  months, he  obtained  a  place  in  a  country 
store,  where  he  remained  about  a  year,  when  he  procured  a  more  desir- 
able position  as  salesman  in  a  store  in  Charlotte,  the  County  town.  In 
a  little  more  than  a  year  he  purchased  the  stock  of  goods  of  his 
employer  on  a  credit,  and  commenced  business  on  his  own  account.  In 
1823,  he  married  Anna  Maria,  dau.  of  Mark  Leavenworth  of  Water- 
bury.  The  death  of  his  father,  which  occurred  about  this  time,  put 
him  in  possession  of  additional  means.  He  continued  the  mercantile 
business  at  Charlotte  until  the  spring  of  1829,    when  he   closed  it  and 


APPENDIX.  515 

removed  to  Waterbur}-,  where  he  engaged  in  the  manufacture  of  clocks, 
under  the  name  of  Mark  Leavenworth  &Co.,  and  in  that  of  gilt  buttons, 
under  the  name  of  Leavenworth  &  Kendrick.  Since  then  he  has  con- 
tinued to  be  interested  to  some  extent  in  the  manufacture  of  the  various 
articles  for  which  Waterbury  is  somewhat  distinguished. 

In  1845,  1847  and  1848,  Mr.  Kendrick  was  a  member  of  the  House 
of  Representatives  of  Connecticut.  In  1846,  he  was  elected  to  the 
Senate,  and  was  chosen  Lieut.  Governor  in  1851.  In  1854,  he  was 
again  a  member  of  the  House,  and  speaker  after  the  resignation  of  L. 
F.  S.  Foster,  who  was  elected  to  the  United  States  Senate.  Through- 
out the  session  of  1856,  he  was  the  speaker  of  the  House  of  Repre- 
sentatives. 

LEAVENWORTH.* 

1.  Thomas  Leavenworth  settled  in  Woodbury,  prior  to  1682. 
Whence  he  came,  I  am  not  informed.  He  died  Aug.  3,  1683,  at  which 
date  the  inventory  of  his  estate  was  exhibited  to  the  Court  of  Probate,  of 
Fairfield  Co.,  and  his  estate  was  ordered  to  be  distributed  to  his  widow, 
one  third  to  his  eldest  son,  a  double  portion  to  his  second  child,  a 
daughter,  and  to  his  third  child,  a  son,  a  single  portion — names  not 
given.  In  the  settlement  of  John  Leavenworth's  estate,  the  names  of 
the  two  sons  are  found  to  have  been,  Thomas  and  John.  Thomas  set- 
tled in  Stratford  and  is  the  progenitor  of  the  Waterbury  and  Wood- 
bury Leavenworths.  Of  John,  I  have  no  definite  information,  but  am 
led  to  believe  he  had  no  male  issue. 

2.  John,  brother  of  Thomas,  (1,)  also  settled  in  Woodbury,  and  d. 
previous  to  Nov.  Y,  1702,  when  Thomas  Leavenworth  of  Stratford  was 
appointed  administrator  of  his  estate,  Feb.  28,  1704.  The  court  order- 
ed the  estate  to  be  distributed  to  Thomas,  the  administrator,  and  to 
John,  brother  of  the  latter. 

3.  Thomas,  son  of  Thomas,  (1,)  settled  in  Stratford,  Ripton  parish, 
where  he  had  land  recorded,  Jan.  1702,  "  near  Mill  River."  He  d.  in 
1748  ;  his  widow,  Mary,  in  1758.  The  following  are  mentioned  as  his 
children,  May  5,  1734.  (In  his  will,  dated  July  6,  1748,  and  in  the  will 
of  Mary   his  widow,  dated  May  11,  1758,  Edmund  and  Ebenezer  are 

*  I  am  aware  that  my  account  of  the  genealogy  of  this  family  will  not  agree  with  the 
genealogical  tree  belonging  to  the  family,  which  was  published  a  few  years  since  ;  neither  will  it 
correspond  with  the  sketch  found  in  Woodbury  His.,  p.  614,  especially  the  first  paragraph  in 
that  work,  as  the  first  part  of  that  sketch  was  taken  from  that  tree  by  the  special  request  of 
members  of  the  family.  The  genealogy  here  given,  has  been  drawn  from  various  records,  with 
the  utmost  care,  and  may  be  relied  upon  as  fact.  The  investigations  I  have  given  the  public 
records,  convince  me  that  the  tree  was  drawn  from  that  untruthful  story-teller,  tradition. 

P.  M.  T 


516  HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 

omitted.  )  Cb. :  I.  Edmund,  remained  at  Stratford,  and  d.  between  July 
12  and  Aug.  15,  1783,  leaving  a  wife.  Abigail,  and  ch.  In  tbe  distribu- 
tion of  his  estate,  Gideon  and  Edmund  are  named  as  his  sons ;  II. 
James,  remained  at  Stratford  ;  III.  Ebenezer,  of  Ripton  parish,  Strat- 
ford, d.  in  1734,  gave  his  estate  to  his  father,  and  to  his  brothers  and 
sisters,  (as  here  named  ;)  IV.  John  settled  in  Woodbury  and  d.  in 
1783,  aged  77  ;*  V.  David  of  Woodbury,  d.  April  10,  1735;  VI. 
Zebulon,  settled  in  Woodbury,  and  d.  in  1793;  VII.  Mark,  b.   1711; 

VIII.  Thomas,  settled  in  Woodbury ;  IX.  Mary,  m.  Joseph  Perry ;  X. 
Hannah,  m.  Nicholas  Moss;  XI.  Sarah,  b.  Nov.  6,  1721,  m.  Abner 
Perry. 

4.  James,  son  of  Thomas,  (3,)  remained  at  Stratford,  m.  Hester 
Trowbridge,  Aug.  23,  1720,  and  d.  1759.     Ch. :  I.  Mahitable,  b.  July 

28,  1721,  ra.  Waterman  ;  II.  Tamer,  b.  May  28,  1727,  m. 

Hurd  ;  III.  Samuel,  b.  Feb.  21,  1729  ;  IV.  Daniel,  b.  March  25,  1731; 

V.  Ann,  b.   April    14,    1733,   m. Lake;  VI.  Mary,   b.  Aug.  13, 

1735;  VII.  James,  b.  July  6,  1737;  VIII.  Esther,  b.  Jan.  27,  1739; 

IX.  Ebenezer,  b.  Sept.  22,  1743,  d.  before  1759. 

5.  Rev.  Mark,  (see  p.  283,)  son  of  Thos.,  (3,)  settled  in  Waterbury. 
He  m.  Feb.  6,  1739-40,  Ruth,  dau.  of  Jeremiah  Peck,  and  grand-dau. 
of  Rev.  Jeremiah  Peck.  She  d.  Aug.  8,  1750,  and  he  m.  Dec.  4,  1750, 
Sarah,  dau.  of  Jesse  Hull,  of  Derby.  He  d.  Aug.  20,  1797.  His  wid. 
Sarah,  d.  May  7,  1808,  aged  82.  Ch. :  I.  Jesse,  b.  Nov.  22,  1741  ;  II. 
Mark,  b.  May  26,  1752,  grad.  Y.  C,  m.  the  wid.  of  Wm.  Sherman,  (son 
of  Roger,)  went  to  France  with  Joel  Barlow,  and  d.  in  Paris,  in  1812  ; 
II.  Joseph,  b.  Jan.  19,  1755,  d.  1756  ;  IV.  Sarah,  b.  Dec.  11,  1756,  m. 
Doct.  Isaac  Baldwin,  and  had  three  daughters,  two  of  whom,  Sarah  and' 
Esther,  m.  Doct.  Edward  Field  ;  the  other,  Rebecca,  d.  unm. ;  V.  William, 
b.Feb.  23,  1759;  VI.  Nathan,  b.  Dec.  11,  1761,  d.  1797;  VII.  Joseph, 
b.  June  15,  1764;  VIII.  Elisha,  b.  Oct.  13,  1766,  m.  1st,  Mrs.  Russell, 
2d, Stone  of  Derby — had  one  son  by  first  wife. 

6.  Samuel,  son  of  James,  (4,)  had  ch.,  and  among  them  Joseph,  b. 
in  1773. 

7.  Jesse,  son  of  Rev.  Mark,  (5,)  grad.  Y.  C.  in  1760,  m.  July  1,  1761, 
Catharine,  wid.  of  Capt.  Culpeper  Frisbie  of  Branford,  and  dau.  of  Mr. 
John  Conkling  of  Southampton,  L.  I.  She  d.  June  29,  1824,  aged  87. 
Ch. :  I.  Melines  Conkling,  b.  Jan.  4,  1762,  grad.  Y.  C.  in  1781,  and 
went  South.  In  1801,  he  m.  Mrs.  Ann  Lamar,  of  Augusta,  Geo.,  and 
continued  to  reside  in  that  city  until  his  death,  wliich  occurred  July  20, 

*  See  Woodbury  His.,  p.  614;   also  for  the  children  of  David,  Thomas  and  Zebulon. 


APPENDIX.  517 

1823  ;  11.  Rutli,  b.  Feb.  25,  1764,  m.  Capt.  Moses  Elkins  of  Peachara, 
Vt.,  and  removed  to  Canada,  where  she  d.  and  wliere  several  of  her  ch. 
now  reside;  III.  Dr.  Frederick,  b.  Sept.  4,  1766;  IV.  Catharine,  b. 
1768,  m.  1st, Dennis,  2d,  Thos.  Peck,  and  d.  June  25,  1815,  leav- 
ing a  son  and  two  daughters;  V.  Jesse,  b.  Aug.  1771  ;  VI.  Mark,  b. 
Aug.  31,  1774. 

8.  William,  son  of  Rev.  Mark,  (5  )  ni.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Ezra  Bron- 
son,  Esq.,  May  1,  1781.  Ch. :  I.  Sarah,  b.  June  20,  1784,  m.  Joel 
Walters  of  New  Haven,  and  had  sons,  Rev.  William,  James,  and  a  dau. 
Caroline,  perhaps  others;  II.  William,  b.  June  20,1786,  m.  Fanny, 
dau.  of  Abel  Porter,  and  had  a  dau.  Sarah,  who  m.  B.  P.  Watrous ;  is 
now  Mrs.  Nash  of  Akron,  Ohio. 

9.  Doct.  Frederick,  son  of  Jesse,  (7,)  m.  Fanny,  dau.  of  Abner 
Johnson,  May  19,  1796.  Ch. :  I.  Lucia,  b.  March  24,  1797,  m.  Rev. 
Asa  M.  Train,  of  Miiford  ;  II.  Eliza,  b.  Dec.  7,  1798,  m.  C.  D.  Kings- 
bury ;*  III.  Frederick  A.,  b.  June  13,  1801,  and  d.  about  1809  ;  IV. 
Abner  J.,  b.  July  12,  1803  ;  V.  Fanny  A.,  m.  Nathanial  Worden,  of 
Bridgeport;  VI.  Elisha. 

10.  Jesse,  son  of  Jesse,  (7,)  removed  to  Danville,  Vt.,  early  in  life, 
where  he  resided  until  his  death,  Jan.  1,  1830.     He  m.  1st,  Nancy  Pope, 

2d,  Martha  Morrill.     Ch. :  I.  Catharine,  m. Hazelton  ;  II.    Doct. 

Frederick;  III.  Nancy,   d.   1821;  IV.  Fanny,  m. Hazelton;  V. 

Maria,  d.  1824  ;  VI.  Melina,  d.  1825  ;  VII.  Jane,  b.  1817  ;  VIII.  Mark, 
b.  1828. 

*  Joseph  Kingsbury,  from  whom  C.  D.  Kingsbury  is  descended,  is  supposed  to  have  emigrated 
from  England  to  Boston,  prior  to  1610.     He  settled  at  Haverhill,  Mass.,  and  had  a  son  Joseph* 

2.  Joseph,  son  of  Joseph,  (1,)  settled  at  Norwich  Farms,  now  Franljlin,  Conn.,  about  1(585. 
The  farm  on  which  he  settled  is  still  owned  and  occupied  by  members  of  the  family.  He  had 
six  sons ;  the  youngest  was  named  Nathaniel. 

3.  Nathaniel,  son  of  Joseph,  (2,)  had  9ch.  who  lived  to  mnnhood,  but  all  d.  in  early  or  middle 
life,  except  John  and  Jacob.  Thejlast  mentioned  was  a  colonel  in  the  U.  S.  army,  and  d.  in. 
1837  or  8,  aged  81. 

4.  John,  (see  p.  422,)  son  of  Nathaniel,  (3,)  was  b.  at  Norwich,  Dec.  30,  1762.  He  settled  in 
Waterbury,  and  m.  Marcia,  dau.  of  Dea.  Stephen  Bronson,  Nov.  6,  1794.  She  d.  March  21,  1813. 
He  d.  Aug.  26, 1844.  Ch.:  I.  Charles  D.,  b.  Nov.  7,  1795;  II.  Julius  Jesse  Bronson,  b.  Oct.  18, 
1797;  III.  John  Southmayd,  b.  Nov.  18,  1801;  IV.  Sarah  Susanna,  b.  Nov.  6,  1807,  m.  William 
Brown,  and  d.  May  30,  1S40. 

5.  Charles  Denison,  son  of  John,  (4,)  ra.  Eliza,  dau.  of  Frederick  Leavenworth,  (9,)  March  3, 
1821.  Ch. :  I.  Fredericli  John,  b.  Jan.  1,  1823,  m.  Alathea  R.,  dau.  of  Wm.  H.  Scovill,  April  29, 
1851.    Ch.,  Wm.  Charles  and  Mary  Eunice  ;  II.  Sarah  Leavenworth,  b.  April  1,  1840., 

6.  Maj.  Julius  J.  B.,  (see  p.  423,)  son  of  John,  (4,)  m.  Jane  C.  Stebbins,  of  N.  Y.  Ch. :  I.  Julius 
H.,  d.  iu  California  ;  II.  Walter ;  III.  Mary  Jane,  m.  Capt.  S.  B.  Buckner,  U.  S.  army  ;  IV. 
Henry  W.,  now  of  the  U.  S.  Military  Academy  at  West  Point. 

7.  John  Southmayd,  son  of  John,  (4,)  m.  Abbey  H.,  dau.  of  Daniel  Hayden,  Jan.  25,  J82T. 
Ch. :  I.  James  D.,  b.  Nov.  22, 1827,  d.  May  7,  1831  ;  II.  Geo.  B.,  b.  Sept.  6,  1829  ;  III.  Marcia  A  , 
b.  May  1,  1832,  m.  R.  Ware,  May  1,  1856 ;  IV.  Sylvia  E.,  b.  Sept.  7,  1834,  ra.  E.  D.  Griggs,  May 
1, 1854  ;  v.  James  D  ,  b.  Sept.  7,  1836,  d.  Jan.  19,  1837  ;  VI.  Harriet  A.,  b.  June  15, 1839  ;  VII. 
Abbey  S.,  b.  June  20,  1842  ;  VIII.  John  J.  D.,  b.  July  27,  1845. 


518  HISTOEY   OF   WATERBUEY. 

11.  Mark,  (see  p.  424,)  son  of  Jesse,  (7,)  m.  Anna,  dau.  of  Moses 
Cook,  wlio  d.  April  9,  1842,  aged  64,  and  he  m.  Susan  J.,  dau.  of 
Joseph  Cook,  Nov.  1844.  She  d.  Dec.  15,  1848,  aged  51,  Ch. :  I. 
Doct.-  Melines  Conklin^^,  b.  Jan.  15,  1Y96,  has  been  a  surgeon  in  the 
U.  S.  array,  and  is  an  eminent  botanist;  11.  Anna  Maria,  b.  Feb.  10, 
1Y98,  m.  Hon.  Green  Kendrick;  III.  Mark  M.,  b.  May  13,  1800,  d. 
July,  1825;  IV.  Benjamin  Franklin,  b.  July  27,  1803,  m.  Jane  Bar- 
tholomew, was  murdered  in  California  ;  V.  Harriet,  b.  July  19, 1807,  d. 
May  25,  1808  ;  VI.  Harriet  H.,  b.  May  19,  1810,  d.  March  23,  1833; 
VII.  Catharine  E.,  b.  Aug.  1,  m.  Corydon  S.  Sperry,  d.  Feb.  9,  1855. 

12.  Joseph,  son  of  Samuel,  (6,)  m.  Tamer,  dau.  of  Benj.  Richards, 
Jan,  12,  1797.  Ch. :  Harriet,  b.  Nov.  19,  1798  ;  Hannah,  b,  Sept.  16, 
1800  ;  Joseph  S.  b.  Dec.  2,  1802,  d.  1841  ;  Samuel  E.,  b.  Aug.  11, 1805, 
d.  1814;  Rebecca,  b.  Feb.  9,  1811,  d.  1838  ;  Mary  G.,  b.  Sept.  6,  1814  ; 
Sarah  Ann,  b.  Aug.  9,  1817. 


LEWIS. 

1.  Joseph  Lewis,  of  Windsor  and  Simsbury,  had  sons,  Joseph  and 
Jolin. 

2.  Dea.  Joseph,  (see  p.  165,)  son  of  Joseph,  (1,)  settled  in  Waterbury, 
and  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Abraham  Andruss,  April  7,  1703,  He  d,  Nov. 
29,  1749,  his  wife  March  6,  1773.  Ch. :  A  dau.,  b.  Aug.  12,  1704,  d. 
Sept.  1704;  IL  Joseph,  b.  July  12,  1705;  IIL  Sarah,"  b.  April  29, 
1708,  m.  Obadiah  Warner;  IV.  John,  b.  April  14,  1711 ;  V.  Mary,  b. 
June  10,  1714,  m.  Daniel  Williams;  VI.  Rev.  Thomas,  b.  Aug.  6,, 
1716,  grad.  at  Y.  C.  in  1741,  became  a  Congregational  clergyman; 
VII.  Samuel,  b.  July  6,  1718  ;  VIIL  Abraham,  b.  Feb.  1721,  d,  young. 

3.  Joseph,  son  of  Joseph,  (2,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  John  Slaughter  of  Sims- 
bury,  Nov.  12, 1727.     She  d.  April  4,  1738,  and  he  m.  Elizabeth 

He  d.  Oct.  22,  1749.  Ch. :  L  Elisha,  b.  Jan.  30,  1728-9  ;  IL  Samuel, 
b.Feb.  8,  1730-31  ;  HL  Damaras,  b.  April  22,  1734,  m.  Samuel  Scott; 
IV.  Joseph,  b.  Oct.  16,  1736;  V.  Abraham;  VI.  Rhoda,  d.  May  2, 
1767. 

4.  John,  son  of  Joseph,  (2,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Samuel  Munn  of 
Woodbury,  Dec.  4,  1734.  She  d.  Sept.  30,  1749,  and  he  m.  Amy, 
dau.  of  Capt.  Samuel  Smith  of  New  Haven,  May  29,  1750.  Ch. :  I. 
David,  b.  April,  1736,  d.  1754  ;  IL  John,  b.  Dec.  1740  ;  IIL  Sarah,  b. 
April,  1743  ;  IV.  Amy,  b.  May  24,  1751  ;  V.  Samuel  Smith,  b.  Sept.  7, 
1753;  VL  David,  b.  April  11,  1756. 

5.  Dea.   Samuel,  son  of  Joseph,  (2,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.   of  Ilezekiah 


APPENDIX.  519 

Rew,  May  19,  1743.  She  d.  in  1759,  and  he  ra.  Eunice,  dau.  of  Ephraim 
Beebe  of  Saybrook,  Nov.  7,  1763,  He  d.  April  11,  1788.  Ch. :  I. 
Abraham,  b.  Oct.  21,  1744,  d.  1749  ;  II.  Rev.  Amzi,  b.  Oct.  9,  1746, 
was  graduated  at  Y.  C.  in  1768,  and  became  a  clergyman  ;  III.  Olive, 
b.  Dec.  10,1749;  IV.  Lucy,  b.  March  18,  1753,  ra.  Simeon  Por- 
ter; V.  Mary  b.  31,  1755,  d.  1759  ;  VI.  Prue,  b.  Jan.  16,  1759, 

m.  Nathan  Porter;  VII.  Hester,  b.  May  3,  1765,  m.  Lucian  Spencer; 
VIII.  Molle,  b.  March  9,  1768,  m.  Culpeper  Hoadley ;  IX.  Samuel,  b. 
June  4,  1770,  d.  while  a  member  of  Y.  C. ;  X.  Asahel,  b.  Aug  8,  1772, 
d.  aged  37,  leaving  a  large  and  respectable  family  ;  XI.  Eunice,  b.  Dec. 
10,  1775,  m.  1st,  Ebenezer  Fairchild,  2d,  Elias  Scott,  both  of  Oxford. 

6.  Elisha,  son  of  Joseph,  (3,)  m.  Tamer,  dau.  of  Samuel  Hale  of  New 
Haven,  June  14,  1750.  Ch. :  I.  Jabez,  b.  Sept.  10,  1751 ;  II.  Tamer,  b. 
Dec.  28,  1752  ;  HI.  Brazilla,  b.  March  28,  1754;  IV.  Naboth,  b.June 
24,  1756. 

7.  John,  son  of  John,  (4,)  was  a  capt.  in  the  Revolution.  He  m. 
Sarah,  dau.  of  James  Gordon,  Nov.  17,  1763.  Ch. :  I.  Anna,  b.  Jan. 
5,  1765;  II.  Ezra,  b.  May  28,  1768;  HI.  Leva,  b.  July  20,  1770  ;  IV. 
.John,  b.  July  16,  1772;  V.  Chauncey ;  VL  Sarah;  VIL  Alanson ; 
VIH.  . 

8.  Abraham,  son  of  Joseph,  (3,)  m.  Ruth  Judd,  Nov.  9,  1767,  who 
d.  April  20,  1814.  Ch. :  I.  Rhoda,  b.  June  6,  1769  ;  H.  Ansel,  b.  July 
18,  1772,  m.  Lydia  Merrill,  and  had  eleven  ch. 

9.  Samuel  Smith,  son  of  John,  (4,)  m.  Abigail  Baldwin,  Feb.  22, 
1776,  and  d.  in  1842.  Ch. :  L  Rev.  Thomas,  b.  April  13,  1777,  grad. 
Y.  C.  in  1798,  and  d.  in  Georgia,  March  3,  1804 ;  IL  Sally,  b.  Aug.  30, 
1781 ;  III.  Milo,  b.  Oct.  22,  1789,  resides  in  Naugatuck. 

PORTER. 

1.  Doct.  Daniel  Porter  of  Farmington,  had  ch. :  Daniel,  Mary,  Nehe 
miah,  Richard,  Ann,  John  and  Samuel.     (See  p.  171.) 

2.  Doct.  Daniel,  son  of  Daniel,  (1,)  had,  Daniel,  James,  Thomas, 
Deborah,  Ebenezer  and  Anne.     (See  p.  172.) 

3.  Richard,  son  of  Daniel,  (1,)  had,  Daniel,  Joshua,  Mary,  Ruth, 
Samuel,  Hezekiah,  John,  Timothy,  Hezekiah,  Joshua  and  Richard.  (See 
p.  173.) 

4.  Doct.  Daniel,  son  of  Daniel,  (2,)  had,  I.  Preserved,  b.  Nov.  23, 
1729  ;  II.  Dr.  Daniel,  b.  March  17,  1731,  was  a  surgeon  in  the  army, 
and  d.  at  Crown  Point  in  1759,  unm.;  IIL  Hannah,  b.  June  16,  1733, 
m.  Obadiah  Scovill ;  IV.  Timothy,  b.  June  19,  1735  ;  V.  Susanna,  b. 
July  17,  1737,  m.  1st,  Daniel  Killam  of  New  Haven,  July  4,  1758,  and 


520  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

2d,  John  Casset  of  Simsbury,  Sept.  1767  ;  VI.  Anna,  b.  Dec.  C,  1738, 
m.  Daniel,  son  of  Josiah  Bronson  ;  VII,  Jemima;  VIII.  Elizabeth. 

5.  Doct.  James,  son  of  Daniel,   (2,)   had,  I.  Huldah,  b.  Dec.  8,  1733, 

m.  1st, Fairchild,  2d,  David  Taylor  ;  II.  James,  b.  Nov.  19,  1737  ; 

III.  David,  Aug.  11,  1746. 

6.  Capt.  Thomas,  son  of  Daniel,  (2,)  had,  I.  Sarah,  b.  Sept.  24,  1728, 
m.  Enoch  Scott ;  II.  Ashbel,  b.  Feb.  2,  1730;  III.  Mary,  b.  Jan.  5, 
1732,  m.  Joel  Sanford;  IV.  Eunice,  b.  April  19,  1734,  d.  unm.;  V. 
Thomas,  b.  May  9,  1736  ;  VI,  Phineas,  b.  Dec.  1, 1739  ;  VII.  Elizabeth, 
b.  May  9,  1741,  m.  Timothy   Clark;  VIII.   Simeon,  b.  June  18,  1744, 

m. Lewis,  and   went   to   Ohio;  IX.  Sybbel,   b.  Aug.   8,  1747,  d. 

young;  X.    Dorcas,    b.    Aug.    2,   1751,   m.   Erastus   Bradley   of  New 
Haven. 

7.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Daniel,  (2,)  bad,  I.  Lydia,  b.  April  9,  1741,  m. 
Abel  Beeeher  of  New  Haven,  Aug.  31, 1764  ;  II.  Asa,  b.  Aug.  7, 1743  ; 

III. ,  b.  1745,  d.  1745;  IV.  Mary,  b.  June  14,  1749,  d.  March  22, 

1760. 

8.  Samuel,  son  of  Doct.  Richard,  (3,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  John  Bron- 
son, May  9,  1722.  Administration  was  granted  on  his  estate  March  22, 
1727-8,  and  only  one  ch.  is  mentioned.  The  wid.  m.  John  Barnes. 
Ch.,  as  recorded,  Samuel,  b.  Dec.  22,  1723  ;  Lucy,  b.  Oct.  12,  1725. 

9.  Timothy,  son  of  Richard,  (3,)  m.  1st,  Mary,  dau.  of  Jonathan 
Baldwin,  Dec.  18,  1735,  and  2d,  Hannah  Winters,  in  1767.  Here- 
moved  to  Stratford.  Ch.,  recorded  in  Waterbury  ;  I.  Sybbel,  b.  March 
23,  1737  ;  IL  John,  b.  Feb.  22,  1739,  m.  Phebe  Curtiss  of  Wallingford, 
Nov.  7,  1770;  III.  Lois,  b.  Feb.  6,  1743  ;  IV.  Mary,  b.  May  8,  1745  ; 
V.  Mark,  b.  March  27,  1748  ;  VI.  Ruth,  b.  May  17,  1750 ';  VIL  and' 
VIH.  Timothy  and  Lucy,  b.  June  8,  1753. 

10.  Preserved,  son  of  Daniel,  (4,)  m.  Sarah  Gould  of  New  Milford, 
April  8,  1764,  who  d.  in  1780.  He  m.  2d,  Lydia  Welton,  Dec.  9,  1781, 
and  d.  Oct,  23,  1803,  Ch. :  L  Hannah,  b.  Nov,  10,  1766,  m,  Joseph 
Bronson;  II,  Levinia,  b,  July  21,  1767,  m,  Doct.  Joseph,  son  of  Doct. 
Timothy  Porter,  and  d,  Nov,  18,  1848  ;  IIL  Isaac,  b.  July  27,  1770,  d. 
June  25,  1772  ;  IV,  Isaac,  b.  March  27,  1774,  m.  Amarilla,  dau.  of  Joel 
Hickox,  still  living,  and  has  a  son,  Preserved  Hickox,  in  Newark,  N,  J, 
V,  Jesse,  b.  Oct,  31,  1777. 

11.  Doct.  Timothy,  son  of  Daniel,  (4,)  m.  Margaret,  dau.  of  Gideon 
Skinner  of  Bolton,  Conn.  She  was  b.  Sept.  27,  1739,  and  d.  April  12, 
1813.  Hed.  Jan.  24,  1792.  Ch. :  I  Daniel,  b.  Sept,  23,  1768;  H. 
Sylvia  C,  b,  Feb.  24,  1771,  ra.  1st,  John  King  of  Bloomfield,  N.  Y.,  2d, 
Nathan  Rose  of  Avon,  N.Y.,  and  d.Feb.l4, 1813;  IH.  Dr.  Joseph,  b,  Sept. 


APPENDIX.  521 

8,1772,111.  Levinia,  dau.  of  Preserved  Porter — no  ch. ;  IV.  Olive,  b. 
July  26,  1775,  m.  Moses  Hall  and  d.  May  30,  1845.  He  d.  Jan.  29, 
1857  ;  V.  Anna,  b.  April  5, 1777,  m.  Richard  F.  Welton,  Dec.  16,  1804; 
VI.  Chauncey,  b.  April  24,  1779  ;  VII.  Timothy  Hopkins,  b.  Nov.  28, 
1785. 

12.  James,  son  of  James,  (5,)  m.  Lucy,  dau.  of  Josiah  Bronson,  Nov. 
9,  1762.  Shed.  Oct.  14,  1776,  and  he  m.  Mary  Gambel,  April  23, 
1778.  He  d.  Nov.  10,  1822.  Ch. :  I.Jesse,  b.  June  25,  1763;  II. 
Dorcas,  b.  June  11,  1766,  ra.  Ward  Peck,  Jan.  22,  1784,  and  d.  May 
11,1847;  HI.  A  son,  b.  Nov,  22,  1768,  d.  same  day;  IV.  James,  b. 
Aug.  3,  1772;  V.  Mary,  b.  Aug.  2,  1779;  VI.  Reuben,  b.  Oct.  24, 
1780;  VII.  Melinda,  b.  April  26,  1783;  VIII.  Clarinda,  b.  Oct.  15, 
1789  ;  IX.  Josiah,  Aug.  30,  1792;  X.  Samuel,  b.  Dec.  28,  1793. 

13.  David,  son  of  James,  (5,)  m.  Esther,  dau.  of  Dea.  Timothy  Hop- 
kins, Dec.  7,  1775.  He  d.  April  4,  1826,  and  his  wid.  d.  Sept.  27,  1831. 
Ch.:  I.  Silas,  b.  Oct.  21,  1776  ;  II.  AVilliara,  b.  March  18,  1782  ;  III. 
David,  b.  June  22,  1783. 

14.  AsHBEL,  son  of  Thos.  (6,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  John  Morris  of 
Stratford,  Nov.  24,  1762.  Ch. :  I.  Sybbel,  b.  Aug.  21,  1764  ;  II.  Ash- 
bel,  b.  Nov.  16,  1766;  III.  Elias,(?)  b.  Jan.  16,  1769;  IV.  Uannah,  (?) 
b.  Jan.  8,  1771. 

15.  Thomas,  son  of  Thos.  (6,)  m.  Mehitable,  dau.  of  Daniel  Hine  of 
New  Milford,  Dec.  12,  1758.  She  d.  June  1,  1837,  aged  98.  Ch. :  I. 
Sybbel,  b.  Nov.  10,  1759;  II.  Rebecca,  b.  June  5,  1761,  m.  Jared  By- 
ington  ;  III.  Truman,  d.  Sept.  8, 1763  ;  IV.  Ethel,  b.  1765,  and  d.  March 
2,  1797. 

16.  CoI.Phineas,  son  of  Thos.  (6,)  m.  Esther,  dau.  of  Thos.  Clark, 
July  12,  1770.  She  d.  March  18,  1772,  and  he  m.  2d,  wid.  Melliscent, 
Lewis,  dau.  of  Jonathan  Baldwin,  Dec.  23,  1778.  Hed.  March  9, 1804. 
Ch.:  I.  Esther,  b.  March  13,  1772,  m.  Levi  Beardsley,  Jan.  5,  1789,  and 
d.  Sept.  5,'  1808  ;  IL  "  Orissana,"  b.  Nov.  1,  1779,  d.  July  8,  1781  ;  UL 
Sally,  b.  Feb.  20,  1782;  IV.  Ansel,  b.  Aug.  2,  1784;  V.  Orlando,  b. 
May  8,  178  7  ;  VL  Betsey,  b.  April  14,  1790,  m.  Zenas  Cook,  and  d. 
Oct.  12,   1857. 

17.  Asa,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (7,)  m.  Deborah  Fuller,  Oct.  22,  1765. 
Ch. :  L  Asa,  b.  June  6,  1767  ;  IL  Climena,  b.  Jan.  8,  1770. 

18.  Samuel,  son  of  Samuel,  (8,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Stephen  Upson, 
Dec.  9,  1747,  and  d.  Jan.  8,  ]  793.  His  wife  d.  March  23,  1780.  Ch. : 
L  Ebenezer,  b.  Jan.  24,  1750  ;  H.  Jemima,  b.  Nov.  13,  1752  ;  III.  Sam- 
uel, b.  Oct.  7,  1755. 

19.  Isaac,  son  of  Doct.  Preserved,  (10,)  ra.   Amarilla,   dau.  of  Joel 


522  HISTORY    OF   WATEKBUKY. 

Hickox,  Nov.  13, 1799,  Ch. :  I.  Sarah  Gould,  b.  April  6,  1800;  II. 
Preserved  H.,  b.  Sept.  9,  1803,  m.  Caroline  Keene,  and  resides  at  New- 
ark,' N.  J. — no  ch. 

20.  Doct.  Jesse,  son  of  Preserved,  (10,)  m.  Comfort,  dau.  of  Chaun- 
cey  Camp,  June  6,  1808.  She  was  b.  March  1,  1786,  and  d.  Aug.  10, 
1855.  Ch.:  I.  Denman  Camp,  b.  May  22,  1810;  II.  Sally  Ann,  b. 
May  6,  1812,  m.  Lewis  Hotchkiss,  who  d. — no  ch. ;  III.  Adelia,  b. 
April  15,  1815,  m.  David  S.  Law  and  d.  March  13,  1857  ;  IV.  Preserved 
G.,  b.  Jan.  18,  1822. 

21.  Daniel,  son  of  Timothy,  (11,)   m.   Ana,   dau.  of Ingham, 

and  grand-dau.  of  Israel  Clark  of  Soutbington,  June  9, 1789.  She  was 
b.  Oct.  17,  1770,  and  d.  March  20,  1831.  Ch. :  L  Horace,  b.  Sept. 
30, 1790;  IL  Timothy,  b.  Jan.  30,  1792  ;  IIL  Elias,  b.  May  14,  1795; 
IV.  Alma  Anna,  b.  April  12, 1800,  m.  AVilliam  Orton,  Jan.  1822,  and 
d.  Feb.  25,  1823,  leaving  a  dau.  Caroline  ;  V.  Daniel,  b.  May  20,  1805, 
— a  physician,  became  insane  in  1845;  VI.  Joseph,  b.  July  11,  1807, 
d.  Jan.  5,  1812. 

22.  Chauncet,  son  of  Timothy,  (11,)  m.  Sylvia  Brockway,  at  Scho- 
dack,  near  Albany,  N.  Y.  He  d.  at  Pittsford,  in  that  State,  May  17, 
1836.  Ch. :  I.  Chauncey,  d.  in  childhood  ;  II.  Sylvia  Rose,  b.  Jan.  19, 
1807,  m.  Lieut.  Richardson,  of  the  U.  S.  Army;  III.  Olive  Ann,  b. 
March  9,  1809,  m.  R.  S.  Williams  of  Avon,  N.  Y. ;  IV.  Caroline,  b. 
June  7,  1811,  m.  George  W.  Chyler,  a  lawyer  of  Palmyra,  N.  Y. ;  V. 
Margaret,  b.  May  9,  1814,  m.  Ephraim  Goss,  a  lawyer  at  Pittsford,  N. 
Y.;  VL  Jane  Maria,  b.  Nov.  21,  1816;  VH.  Chauncey  H.,  b.  Aug. 
11,  1818;  VIIL  Mary  E.,  b.  May  18,  1821  ;  IX.  Sarah  L.,  b.  Jan.  25, 
1824  ;  X.  James  IL,  b.  Nov.  5,  1826. 

23.  Hon.  Timothy  IL,  son  of  Doct.  Timothy,  (11,)  m.  Lucy,  dau.  of 
Judge  Moore  of  Angelica,  N.  Y.,  Nov.  8,  1811,  and  d.  at  Olean,  N.  Y., 
Dec.  1845.  Ch.:  L  Willard,  b.  Aug.  7,  1812,  d.  July  26,  1819;  IL 
Joseph  Hopkins,  b.  April  11,  1818  ;  IH.  Olive  M.,  b.  July  27,  1820,  d. 
Feb.  26, 1821 ;  IV.  Harriet  M.,  b.  June  7,  1822  ;  V.  John,  b.  April  25, 
1824;  VL  Lucy,  b.  Aug.  6,  1826,  d.  Feb.  8,  1831  ;  VIL  Timothy,  b. 
April  20,  1828,  d.  April  6,  1829  ;  VIIL  Willard,  b.  June  8,  1830  ;  IX. 
Edward,  b.  March  20,  1832;  X.  George,  b.  Feb.  25,  1834;  XL  James, 
b.  Sept.  16,  1835;  XIL  Andrew,  b.  Aug.  11,  1839,  d.  Oct.  6,  1841. 

24.  Silas,  son  of  David,  (13,)  m.  Polly,  dau.  of  Benjamin  Strong  of 
Southbury,  Dec.  21,  1802.  Ch. :  L  Edwin,  b.  Feb.  25,  1804  ;  IL  Es- 
ther, b.  June  8,  1806. 

25.  Truman,  son  of  Thos.,  (15,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Jonathan  Thomp- 
son of  New  Haven,  Jan.  1,  1784.     Ch. :  I.  Margaret,  b.  Nov.  23, 1784  ; 


APPENDIX. 


523 


II.  Minerva,  b.  Oct.  24,  1788;  III.  Julius,  b.  Aug.  26,  1790;  IV. 
Thomas,  b.  Jan.  7,  1793;  V.  Alma,  b.  Feb.  9,  1795;  VI.  Sally,  b. 
Sept.  25,  1801;  VII.  Myretta,  b.  June  24,  1803  ;  VIII.  Hector,  b. 
Aug.  11,  1805;  IX.  William,  b.  Oct.  20,  1807,  d.  March  30,  1809. 

26.  Ansel,  son  of  Phineas,  (16,)  m.  Lucy,  dau.  of  Ward  Peck» 
April,  1806, — was  an  officer  in  the  war  of  1812,  and  d.  Oct.  9,  1814. 
Ch, :  Phineas,  d.  aged  10    months:  II.  Melliscent,  d.    aged   about  7  ; 

III.  Ansel  Charles,  b.  Nov.  16,  1811,  m.  Ruth  Ann,  dau.  of  Cyrus 
Sherman  of  Woodbury, — has  had  two  ch. 

27.  Orlando,  son  of  Phineas,  (16,)  m.  Olive,  dau.  of  Samuel  Frost, 
and   went   to   Pa.,  and  d.  at  Harrisburg,  Jan.  1,  1836.     Ch. :  I.  Eliza 

M.,d.  young;  II.  Mary  M.,  b.   July  2,    1816,  m.  1st, Bartis,  2d, 

Doct.  Bradford, — is  living  near  Wilksbarre,  Pa.;  III.  George  Phin- 
eas, m.  Julia  Worthing,  of  Kingston,  is  a  Methodist  preacher. 

28.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Samuel,  (18,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Ephraim  Bee- 
be,  Aug.  31,1774.  Ch. :  I.  Daniel,  b.  Aug.  26,  1775;  II.  Asa,  b. 
Jan.  26,  1778;  III.  Samuel  E.,  b.  July  20,  1782;  IV.  Ezra,  b.  May 
27,  1785  ;  V.  Olive,  b.  Feb.  23,  1787,  d.  March  13,  1787;  VI.  Aaron, 
b.  Feb.  23,  1790,  d.  same  day. 

29.  Samuel,  son  of  Samuel,  (18,)  m.  Sybbel,  dau.  of  Obadiah  Mon- 
son,  Jan.  28,  1778.  Shed.  Feb.  5,  1794,  and  he  m.  Lucy,  dau.  of 
Dea.  Andrew  Bronson,  Nov.  22,  1795.  Ch. :  L  Lucy,  b.  Nov.  14, 
1778  ;  II.  Eunice,  b.  March  23,  1780,  d.  May  1,  1780  ;  III.  Stephen, 
b.  Sept.  22,  1781  ;  IV.  Obadiah,  b.  July  24,  1783;  V.  Azubah,  b.  July 
6,  1785;  VL  Mar-shal,  b.  June  4,  1788;  VIL  Samuel  M.,  b.  May, 
1790;  VIIL  Shelden,  b.  March  31,  1792;  IX.  L.  Bronson,  b.  Sept.  8, 
1799;  X.  Leonard,  b.  July  23,  1802. 

30.  Horace,  son  of  Daniel,  (21,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Ebenezer  Fris- 
bie,  May  20,  1811.  Shed.  April  11,  1844,  and  he  m.  Esther  M.  W. 
Hull,  Nov.  23,  184.5.  Ch.:  L  Horace  Clark,  b.  March  9,  1812,  d.  Aug. 
11,  1831 ;  II.  Hannah  C,  b.  Sept.  1,  1813,  m.  Christopher  L.  Ward,  of 
Towanda,  Pa.,  has  a  .son  Henry;  HI.  Hamlet  C,  b.  July  11,  1815,  d. 
Aug.  9,  1834;  IV.  Hobart  C,  b.  Feb.  2,  1819,  ra.  Jerusha,  dau.  of 
Benj.  Bronson,  has  two  ch. ;  V.  Henry  C,  b.  April  20,1825,  ni.  Eliza 
E.,  dau.  of  Nathan  N.  Betts,  of  Towanda,  Pa.,  is  a  physician  ;  VI.  Mar- 
garet A.,  b.  July  27,  1846;  VIL  Sarah  E.,  b.  Aug.  19,  1849. 

31.  Timothy,  son  of  Daniel,  (21,)  m.  Clara,  dau.  of  Ebenezer  Frisbie. 
She  d.  Nov.  18,  1821,  and  he  m.  Polly  Ann  Todd,  Dec.  20, 1824.  Ch. : 
L  Joseph,  b.  June  5,  1812;  IL  Mary  Ann,  b.  Aug.  21,  1815;  III. 
Jane  E.,  b.  Feb.  1818  ;  IV.  Timothy  H.,  b.  Feb.  16,  1826 ;  V.  Nathan 


524 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBDEY. 


T.,  b.Dec.  9, 1828  ;  YL  Thomas,  b.  Feb.  7,  1831  ;  Yll.  David  G.,  b. 
March  8,  1833  ;  VIII.  Samuel  M.,  b.  May  17,  1835. 

32.  Elias,  son  of  Daniel,  (21,)  m.  Alma  Tyler,  Jan.  22,  181V,— has 
one  child,  James,  b.  March  26,  1818. 

PRICHARD. 

1.  Roger  Prichard  came  from  Springfield,  Mass.,  to  Milford,  Conn., 
previous  to  Dec.  18,  1653,  at  which  date  he  married  Elizabeth  Slough 
of  Milford.     He  had  sons,  Joseph  and  Benjamin.     Joseph  was  b.  Oct. 

2,  1654,  Benjamin   Jan.  31,  1657.     The  last  m. ,  Nov.  14, 

1683. 

2.  Benjamin  and  James  Prichard  removed  from  Milford  to  Water- 
bury  about  1733.  Roger  Prichard,  also  from  Milford,  settled  at  Water- 
bury  in  1738.  They  were  all  married  and  had  children  previous  to 
their  settlement  in  Waterbury. 

3.  Benjamin,  (2,)  m.  1st,  Mary  Andrews  of  Milford,  Jan.  20,  1712-13, 
and  2d,  Hannah  Marks,  July  4,  1733.  He  d.  in  1760,  leaving  ch. :  I. 
John  ;  II.  Benjamin  ;  HI.  Nathaniel ;  IV.  Elnathan  ;  Y.  Desire,  b.  July 
7,  1734  ;  VI.  Jonathan,  b.  Oct.  19,  1739  ;  VII.  Esther. 

4.  James,  (2,)  m.  Elizabeth  Johnson  of  Stratford,  Dec.  25,  1721,  and 
d.  1749.  Ch. :  I.  James,  b.  Jan.  31,1722-3;  II.  George,  b.  Oct.  5, 
1724;  III.  Elizabeth,  b.  March  12,  1726  ;  lY.  Isaac,  b.  Sept.  20,  1729  ; 
Y.  John,  b.  July  25,  1734,  d.  1749  ;  VI.  David,  b.  April  7,  1737  ;  YII. 
Anna,  b.  April  4,  1740. 

5.  Roger,    (2,)    m.    1st,    Hannah    Northrup    of   Milford,    March    8, 

1715-16,  and  2d,  Sarah  ,  and  d.  May  18,  1760.     Ch.:  I.  Roger; 

II.  Sarah,  m.  Joseph  Fenn,  Jr.;  III.  Ann,  m.  Stephen  Bradley;  IV.' 

Phebe,  b.  April  16,  1731,  ra.  Warner;  V.  Abigail,  b,  March  15, 

1733,  d.  before  1760;  VI.  Sibella,  b.  June,  1736,  d.  young;  VII. 
Abraham,  b.  Oct.  12,  1737  ;  YIII.  Amos,  b.  Aug.  27,  1739  ;  IX.  Elihu, 
b.  Oct.  27,  1741. 

6.  James,  son  of  James,  (4,)  m.  Abigail,  dau.  of  Ebenezer  Hickox, 
Aug.  7,  1740,  and  had,  I.  Jabez,  b.  Feb.  18,  1741  ;  II.  Jerahiah,  b.  April 
13,  1743  ;  III.  Elisha,  b.  Oct.  1,  1745,  d.  1749  ;  IV.  "James  the  Less," 
b.  April,  1748,  d.  1749;  V.  James,  b.  June  4,  1750;  VI.  Abigail,  b. 
May  14,  1752. 

7.  George,  son  of  James,  (4,)  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Abraham  Hotch- 
kiss  of  New  Haven,  Feb.  8,  1  744-5,  and  d.  Oct.  21,  1820.  His  wife  d. 
Feb.  17,  1802.  Ch. :  I.  Chloe,  b.  Sept.  30,  1745  ;  II.  George,  b.  April 
4,  1747  ;  III.  Patience,  b.  Dec.  10,  1748,  d.  1749;  IV.  Patience,  b. 
May   8,  1751;  Y.  John,  b.  April  3,  1753;    YI.  Isaiah,  b.  March  30, 


APPENDIX.  525 

1755;  VII.  Didymus,  b.  April  27,  1757,  d.  1758;  VIIT.  Hannah,  b. 
Dec.  5,  1758 ;  IX.  Elizabeth,  b.  Sept.  7,  1762;  X.  Kebecca,  b.  Sept.  16, 
1765. 

8.  Isaac,  son  of  James,  (4,)  ra.  Lois,  dau.  of  Isaac  Bronson,  Oct.  4, 
1758.  Ch:  I.  Jared,b.May  15,  1760  ;  II.  Lidda,  b.  April  24,  1763,  and 
others. 

9.  David,  son  of  Jaraes,  (4,)  m.  Ruth  Smith.  Ch. :  I.  Archibald,  b. 
June  25,  1758;  II.  Ruth;  III.  Miriam;  IV.  Philo;  V.  Sylvia;  VI. 
Molle,  d.  1772;  VII.  Molle;  VIII.  David;  IX.  Damon,  b.  Nov.  5, 
1777 ;  X.  Sally,  b.  June  28,  1780. 

10.  Roger,  son  of  Roger,  (5,)  m.  Ann  Buggbe  of  Derby,  Feb.  16, 
1742-3.  Ch.:  I.  Philenor,  b.  May  18,  1744;  II.  Sybel,  b.  Oct.  25, 
1 745,  d.  1749;  III.  Elihu,b.  Sept.  19,  1747,  d.  1749  ;  IV.  Elihu,  b.  July 
19,  1749,  d.  1751  ;  V.  Ann,  b.  April  24,  1752;  VI.  Thomas,  b.  Nov.  29, 
1754;  VII.  Eliphalet,  b.  Dee.  2,  1756  ;  VIII.  Elihu,  b.  May  23,  1759. 

11.  Abraham,  son  of  Roger,  (5,)  m.  Abigail,  dau.  of  Thomas  Smith 
of  Derby,  March  13,  1766,  and  had,  I.  Reuben,  b.  Sept.  30,  1766  ;  II. 
Abigiil,  b.  Jan.  28,  1768;  III.  Sybel,  b.  Oct.  21,  1769,  d.  Nov.  1769  ; 
IV.  John  Smith,  b.  Oct.  27,  1770,  d.  1773;  V.  Sarah,  b.  1773;  VI. 
;  VI.  Phebe,  b.  March  20,  1778. 

12.  Amos,  son  of  Roger,  (5,)  m.  Lydia  Blakeslee,  May  26,  1768,  who 
d.  1771,  and  he  m.  2d,  wid.  Mary  Adams,  Aug.  20,  1777.  Ch. :  I. 
Lydia,  b.  April  12,  1769;  II.  Amos,  b.  Oct.  22,  1770  ;  IIL  Roger,  b. 
May  17,  1777,  d.  1779  ;  IV.  Sabra,  b.  Jan.  6,  1780;  V.  Roger,  b.  May 
7,  1782;  VL  Orra,  b.  Oct.  26,  1783;  VIL  Elias,  b.  Jan.  28,  1786; 
VIIL  Aaron,  b.  Dec.  1,  1788  ;  IX.  Ruth,  b.  Oct.  17,  1791. 

13.  George,  son  of  George,  (7,)  m.  Hannah  Williams,  Dec.  24, 
1767.  Ch,  :  L  Didimus,  b.  May  28,  1769 ;  IL  Jane,  b.  Sept.  23,  1771  ; 
III.  Cbloe,  b.  Oct.  23,  1773  ;  IV.  Ezra,  b.  Oct.  10,  1775. 

14.  Archibald,  son  of  David,  (9,)  m.  Sybil,  dau.  of  John  Smith  of 
Canterbury,  Oct.  28,  1782.  Ch. :  L  Julius  C,  b.June  15,  1784,  d.  1788; 
IL  '-Softey,"  b.  Aug.  28,  1786  ;  IIL  Adelia. 

15.  Philo,  son  of  David,  (9,)  m.  Sabra  Johnson,  Dec.  17,  1783.  Ch. : 
L"Suky,"  b.  July  26,  1784. 

16.  David,  son  of  David,  (9,)  m.  Anne,  dau.  of  Benjamin  Hitchcock, 
Nov.  9,  1797.  Ch. :  L  Minerva,  b.  June  22,1798;  IL  William,  b. 
March  20,  1800 ;  III.  Julius  Smith,  b.  Feb.  14,  1802  ;  IV.  Elizur  E.,  b. 
Sept.  19,  1804  ;  V.  Anna,  b.  Sept.  9,  1806  ;  VL  Sally  H,  b.  Aug.  29, 
1808;  VIL  Dr.  David,  b.  Oct.  24,  1810;  VIIL  Samuel  H.,  b.  May 
27,  1813  ;  IX.  Charlotte  L.,  b.  June  27,  1816. 

17.  JoH.v,  sou   of  Abraham,  (11,)  m.  Anna,  dau.  of  Eben  Hotchkiss, 


526  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

March  25,1806.  Ch. :  I.  Eben,  b.  Nov.  6,  1806,  II.  Beza,  b.  April 
22,  1808. 

I  have  not  found  the  connection  of  the  following  with  the  pre- 
ceding. 

JosKPH  Prichard,  son  of of  Milford,  m.  Rebecca,  dau.  of  Jan\es 

Smith  of  Waterbury,  Aug.  2,  1761,  and  d.  at  Saybrook,  Oct.  23,  1775, 
aged  35.  Ch. :  I.  Sarah,  b.  Sept.  5, 1763  ;'  11.  Mary,  b.  Aug.  19,  1765  ; 
III.  Thomas  Gaius,  b.  Oct.  3,  1768  ;  IV.  William,  b.  June  4,  1771  ;  V. 
Elizabeth,  b.  April  14,  1774. 

RICHARDSON. 

1.  Thomas  Richardson  or  Richason  had  ch.,  Thomas,  Mary, 
Sarah,  John,  Israel,  Rebecca,  Ruth,  Johannah,  Nathaniel,  Ebenezer. 
(See  p.  179.) 

2.  John,  son  of  Thomas,  (1,)  had  ch.,  I.  Ruth,  b.  Feb.  10,  1701-2,  m. 
1st,  John  Hill,  2d,  Moses  Doolittle;  II.  and  III.  b.  Sept.  4,  1703,  and 
d.  the  same  month  ;  IV.  Elizabeth,  b.  Oct.  5,  1704,  m.  Nathaniel  Arnold, 
Jr. ;  V.  Mary,  b.  Feb.  14,  1707,  m,  Nathan  Prindle  ;  VI.  Sarah,  b.  April 
28,  1710,  m.  Samuel  Weed;  VII.  John,  b.  March  5,  1713,  d.  before 
Nov.  28,  1749.  His  estate  was  distributed  to  his  four  sisters  or  their 
children. 

3.  Israel,  son  of  Thomas,  (1,)  had  ch.:  I.  Mary,  b.  April  16,  1699, 
d.  Dec.  5,  1712;  II.  Hannah,  b.  April  2,  1705,  m.  John  Scott;  III. 
Joseph,  b.  June  11,  1708;  IV.  Israel,  b.  Aug.  28,  1711,  lived  in  Sun- 
derland, Mass. 

4.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Thomas,  (1,)  had  ch. :  I.  Phebe,  b.  April  22, 
1716,  d.  Jan.  9,  1717;  II.  Phebe,  b.  Dec.  15,  I7l7;  HI.  Thomas,  b. 
Dec.  7,  1720;  IV.  Joseph,  b.  Sept.  24,  1725,  d.  young;  V.  Nathaniel, 
b.  April  8,  1729;  VI.  Sarah,  b.  Dec.  23,  1731. 

5.  Thomas,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (4,)  m.  Abigail  Way,  April  8,  1756, 
who  d.  Jan.  21,  1775,  and  he  m.  2d,  Eunice,  wid.  of  John  Hickox, 
April  15,  1776.  Ch. :  I.  Sarah,  b.  June  8,  1757,  d.  Jan.  13,  1772  ;  II. 
Irene,  b.  March  15,  1759,  d.  July  6,  1774;  III.  Chloe,  b.  July  26, 
1761,  d.  Feb.  25,  1776;  IV.  Israel,  b.  Sept.  25,  1764,  d.  March  29, 
1772;  V.  Abigail,  b.  May  24,  1769,  d.  April  8,  1772;  VI.  Anner,  b. 
March  13,  1771,  d.  April  20,  1772;  VII.  Thomas,  b.  June  12,  1777  ; 
VIII.  Margaret,  b.  Aug.  14,  1779,  m.  John  Beecher  ;  IX.  Eunice,  b. 
Dec.  21,  1781,  m.  Samuel  Porter. 

6.  Nathaniel,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (4,)  .m.  Phebe,  dau.  of  John  Bron- 
son,  April  I,  1752,  and  d.  Oct.  31,  1792.  His  wife  d.  April  6,  1811, 
Ch.:  I.  Joseph,  b.  March  28,  1754,  d.  June   16,  1773;  H.  Tamer,  b! 


APPENDIX.  527 

Sept.  13,  1*758,  m.  Stephen  Hotchkiss;  III.  Ruth,  b.  Dec.  15,  1761,  m, 
Ashbel  Osborne,  June  9,  1785 ;  IV.  Phebe,  b.  June  17,  1765,  m.  Joseph 
Bartholomew,  d.  Oct.  1800  ;  V.  Ebenezer,  b.  Sept.  3, 1769,  ra.  Mehitable 
Clark,  lived  in  Middlebury,  had  14  ch.  and  d.  Feb.  1826;  VI.  Hannah, 
b.  May  22,  1772,  d.  July  20,  1773  ;  VII.  Nathaniel,  b.  Oct.  28,  1774  ; 
VIII.  Hannah,  b.  Oct.  18,  1779,  ra.  Reuben  Upson. 

7.  Nathaniel,  son  of  Nathaniel,  (6,)  m.  Comfort  Stone,  April,  1794. 
She  d.  March  29,  1756.  Ch. :  I.Maria,  b.  Jan.  6,  1795,  m.  Garry 
Bronson  ;  II.  Nancy,  b.  March  8,  l797,m.  Merritt  Piatt,  May,1815.  He 
d.  Sept.  1815,  and  she  m.  Leonard  Bronson,  April  14. 1819  ;  III.  Julia,  b. 
1799,  d.  1800  ;  IV.  John  Bronson,  b.  Nov.  1804,  graduated  at  Dartmouth 
College,  is  a  clergyman  at  Pittsford,  N.  Y.  He  ra.  Maria,  dau.  of  Philo 
Bronson,  in  1832,  who  d.  in  1834,  and  he  m.  in  1836,  Susan  A.,  sister 
of  his  first  wife,  who  d.  April,  1856  ;  V.  Nathaniel  S.,  b.  1810,  gradua- 
ted at  Y.  C,  is  an  Episcopal  clergyman,  has  been  settled  at  Watertown 
and  Derby,  and  is  now  editor  of  the  Chun-h  Review.  He  m.  Lydia, 
dau.  of  James  Murdock,  D.D.,  of  New  Haven  ;  VI.  Mtrritt  P.,  b.  1816, 
d.  the  same  year;  VII.  Samuel  S.,  b.  Dec.  1817,  d.  at  Harrisburg, 
Pa.,  Sept.  4,  1842,  while  a  member  of  Union  College. 

SCOTT. 

1.  Edmund  Scott,  of  Farraington  and  Waterbury,  had  ch.,  Joseph, 
Edmund,  Samuel,  Jonathan,  George,  David,  Robert,  Elizabeth  and  Han- 
nah.    (Seep.  181.) 

2.  Edmund,  son  of  Edmund,  (1,)  had  Sarali,  Samuel,  Elizabeth,  Han- 
nah, Edmund,  John,  Jonathan.     (See  p.  183.) 

3.  Jonathan,  son  of  Edmund,  (1,)  had  Jonathan,  John,  Martha,  Ger- 
shom,  Eleazer,  Daniel.     (See  p.  184.) 

4.  George,  son  of  Edmund,  (1,)  had,  I.  Obadiah,  b.  April  5,  1692; 
H.  George,  b.  March  20,  1694,  d.  May  9,  1725,  unm. ;  II.  William,  b. 
March  3,  1696  ;  IV.  Elizabeth,  b.  April  4,  1698,  ra.  Gamaliel  Terrel 
and  went  to  New  Milford ;  V.  Zebulon,  b.  Jan.  10,  1700,  d.  1701 ;  VI. 
Samuel,  b.  April  26,  1702  ;  VII.  Edmund,  b.  Sept.  4,  1704  ;  VHI.  Ben- 
jamin, b.  April  30,  1707,  d.  Dec.  1725  ;  IX.  Ephraira,  b.  June  16,  1710, 
d.  Feb.  27,  1744-5. 

5.  David,  son  of  Edraund,  (1,)  had,  I.  Hannah,  b.  March  21,  1698-9; 
11.  Hester,  b.  Aug.  1700;  HI.  David,  b.  May  12,  1701;  IV.  Ruth,  b. 
Sept.  29,  1704,  m.  Jonathan  Kelsey ;  V.  and  VI.  Martha  and  Mary,  b. 
Jan.  1707;  Martha,  d.  April,  1707;  VII.  Elizabeth,  b.  May  7,  l709,m. 
Samuel  Judd ;  VIII.  Stephen,  b.  March  12,  1711  ;  IX.  Obadiah,  b.  Dec, 
4,  1714. 


528  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

6.  Samuel,  son  of  Edmund,  (2,)  ra.  Mary,  dau.  of  John  Richards, 
Jan.  13, 1725,  and  d.  April  3,  17G8.  Ch. :  I.  Gideon,  b.  Sept.  22,  1725  ; 
11.  Lois,  b.  March  20,  1727  ;  III.  Abraham,  b.  April  26,  1729,  d.  Jan.  8, 
1730-1 ;  IV.  Isaac,  b.  April  26,  1729;  V.  Abraham,  b.  Oct.  18,  1731, 
d.  Nov.  8,  1732;  VI.  Mary,  b.  Sept.  7,  1733;  VII.  Sarah,  b.  April  4, 
1735,  ni.  Edmund  Scott;  VIII.  Samuel,  b.  Feb.  14,  1738,  m.  Damaras 
Lewis;  IX.  Jemima,  b.  Nov.  23,  1740,  m.  Jeremiah  Peck,  Jr. 

7.  Edmund,  son  of  Edmund,  (2,)  m.  Martha,  dau.  of  John  Andruss, 
Aug.  12,  1730,  and  d.  March  23,  1733.  His  wid.  m.  Ebenezer  Warner, 
April  18,  1734.  Ch. :  L  Jemima,  b.  May  2,  1731,  d.  May  16,  1735  :  IL 
Comfort,  b.  July  22,  1733,  m.  Obadiah  Scott. 

8.  John,  son  of  Edmund,  (2,)  m.  Eunice,  dau.  of  Thos.  Griffin  of  Sims- 
bury,  Oct.  29,  1730.  He  d.  March  14,  1756.  Ch. :  L  Amos,  b.  Feb. 
19,  1732;  IL  John,  b.  Jan.  30,  1734,  d.  in  1766,  no  issue;  III. Edmund, 
b.  Jan.  9,  1736,  m.  Sarah  Scott,  and  d.  about  1760,  no  issue;  IV.  Abra- 
ham, b.  March  18,  1739,  "killed  with  thunder,"  April  7,  1750;  V.  Eu- 
nice, b.  Jan.  4,  1741,  d.  Aug.  12,  1759;  VL  Abigail,  b.  Oct.  5,  1743,  m. 

Moses;  VII.  Jonathan,  b.  Oct.  1745,  d.  1749;  VIIL  Reuben,  b. 

Aug.  15,  1747  ;  IX.  Abraham,  b.  May  11,  1750,  d.  March,  1753;  X. 
Abel,  b.  Nov.  19,  1756,  m.  Anne  Perkins  of  New  Haven,  Jan.  30,  1776 
— had  ch. 

9.  Jonathan,  son  of  Jonathan,  (3,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Joseph  Hurlbut 
of  Woodbury,  July  14,  1725.  She  d.  May,  1727,  and  he  m.  2d,  Re- 
becca, dau.  of  Samuel  Frost  of  Branford,  July  29,  1729.  He  d.  May 
16,  1745.  Ch. :  L  John,  b.  May  6,  1726;  IL  Abel,  b.  Aug.  3,  1730 ; 
in.  Thankful,  b.  May  10,  1732;  IV.  Phebe,  b.  May  24,  1734;  V.  Re- 
becca, b.  Oct.  3,  1736  ;  VL  Rachel,  b.  Nov.  3,  1739  ;  VII.  Eben,  b; 
July,  1747. 

10.  Gershom,  son  of  Jonathan,  (3,)  m.  Mary,  dau,  of  Jonathan  Fen- 
ton  of  Fairfield,  Nov.  17,  1728,  and  d.  June  24,  1780.  Ch.:  L  Wait, 
b.  Aug.  17,  1729;  IL  Hannah,  b.  Sept.  9,  1731,  ra.  E.  Scott;  IIL 
Sarah,  b.  Sept.  1735;  IV.  Mary,  b.  May  17,  1739 ;  V.  and  VI.  Gershom 
and  Ann,  b.  June  9,  1744.  Gershom  d.  June  29,  1778.  Ann  m.  Amos 
Hotchkiss. 

11.  Doct.  Daniel,  son  of  Jonathan,  (3,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  David 
Way,  and  d.  April  2,  1762.  Ch. :  L  Esther,  b.  May  23,  1750 ;  H.  Jona- 
than, b.  Sept.  29,  1751 ;  IIL  John,  b.  April  30,  1753  ;  IV.  Martha,  b. 
Jan.  19,  1755,  d.  Aug.  31,  1759;  V.  Eleazer,  b.  May  24,1756;  VL 
Elizabeth,  b.  Sept.  21,  1757,  d.  Sept.  15,  1759;  VII.  Hannah,  b.  Jan. 
16,  1759;  VIH.  Daniel,  b.  Oct.  1,  1760. 

12.  Obadiau,  son  of  George,  (4,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Ezekiel  Buck  of 


APPENDIX.  529 

Wethersfield,  Oct.   10,  1716,  and  d.  in  1735.       His  wife  d.  June  12, 

1749.     Ch. :  I. ,  b.  June  20,1717;  11.  Zebulon,  b.  June  16,  1718; 

III.  Mary,  b.  1720,  d.  Sept.  1722;  IV.  Enoch,  b.  Oct.  1722;  V. 
Comfort,  b.  Jan.  31,  1723;  VI.  George,  b.  Nov.  10,  1725;  VII.  Oba- 
diah,  b.  Jan.  6,  1727  ;  VIII.  Ezekiel,  b.  Sept.  20,  1730. 

13.  William,  son  of  George,  (4,)  m.  Johannah,  dau.  of  Thos.  J  add  of 
Hartford,  Nov.  30,  1727.  She  d.  Jan.  25,  1771.  Ch. :  I.  Benjamin,  b. 
Sept.  6,  1728  ;  II.  Timothy,  b.  April  21,  1731;  III.  Anne,  b.  Jan.  11, 
1734,  d.  Oct,  30,1749;  iv.  Rachel,  b.  Sept.  27,  1736,  d.  April  2, 
1766  ;  V.  Patience,  b.  Nov.  1748,  1740. 

14.  Samuel,  son  of  George,  (4,)  m.  Presilla,  dau.  of  John  Hull  of 
Derby,  Sept.  26,  1727.  Shed.  Sept.  23,  1735,  and  he  m.  2d,  vvid. 
Lois  Striclin,  May  4,  1756,  who  d.  Nov.  29,  1762.  He  m.  3d,  Eunice 
Ashley  of  Hartford,  March  17,  1763,  and  d.  Sept.  15,  1790.  Ch. :  I. 
Sybel,  b.  July  6,  1730,  d.  March  1,  1798,  unra.;  II.  Elizabeth,  b.  Feb. 
27,  1732,  d.  Sept.  1,  1814,  unm.;  III.  Ebenezer,  b.  April  18,  1735,  ra. 
Mary  Weed;  IV.  Eunice,  b.  June  11,1738;  V.  Samuel,  b.  April  10, 
1744,  d.  Sept.  20,  1749  ;  VI.  Ashley,  b.  June  17,  1764. 

15.  Edmund,  son  of  George,  (4,)  m.  Martha,  dau.  of  Robert  Royce  of 
Wallingfurd,  March  26,  1730.  Ch. :  I.  Mary,  b.  March  23,  1731  ;  II. 
Robert,  b.  Aug.  3,  1733,  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Gamaliel  Terrel,  Dec.  29, 
1762  ;  III.  Noah,  b.  Jan.  24,  1736,  d.  May  9,  1737;  IV.  Ebenezer,  b. 
March  23,  1738",  d.  same  day  ;  V.  Martha,  b.  May  2,  1739  ;  VI.  Abi- 
gail, b.  July  3,  1742;  VII.  Comfort,  b.  April  24,  1745;  VHI.  Noah, 
b.  April  4,  1748  ;  IX.  Lydia,  b.  March  23,  1751. 

16.  David,  son  of  David,  (5,)  ra.  Hannah,  dau.  of  William  Hickox, 
Jan.  25,  1735.  Ch.  :  I.  Zadock,  b.  Oct.  15,  1733,  d.  1746  ;  II.  Nathan, 
b.  Aug.  23,  1735,  d.  1748;  HI.  David,  b.  June  22,  1738;  IV.  Pa- 
tience, d.  May  9,  1747  ;  V.  Hannah,  d.  June  29,  1754  ;  VI.  Submit,  b. 
Dec.  22,  1746 ;  VII.  Sarah,  b.  June  8,  1749,  m.  Wait  Smith. 

17.  Stephen,  son  of  David,  (5,)  m.  Rebecca,  dau.  of  John  Wolsey  of 
Jamaica,  L.  I.,  April  9,  1734,  and  d.  March  25,  1744.  Ch. :  I.  Sarah, 
b.  Feb.  14,  1736,  d.  Sept.  11,  1749;  II.  Stephen,  b.  Sept.  14, 1738;  III. 
Wolsey,  b,  April  13,  1741,  d.  in  Watertown,  Dec.  12,  1794. 

18.  Obadiah,  son  of  David,  (5,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  John  Andruss, 
May  20,  1733.  Ch. :  I.  and  11.  twins,  d.  young;  III.  Eliphas,  b.  Jan. 
3,  1735  ;  IV.  Obadiah,  b.  April  12,  1737;  V.  Jesse,  b.  May  30,  1739; 
VI.  Barnabas,  b.  March  7,  1741  ;  VII.  Abigail,  b.  July  3,  1746  ;  VIII. 
Margaret,  b.  July  30,  1748;  IX.  Mary,  b.  Sept.  14,  1750;  X.  Elizabeth, 
b.  Feb.  15,  1753  ;  XI.  Ruth,  b.  Nov.  1756. 

19.  Gideon,  son  of  Samuel,  (6,)  m.  Phebe  Barnes,  April  15,  1755. 

34 


530  HISTORY   OF   WATEKBUET. 

She  d.  April  25,  1760,  and  he  in.  Hannah,  wid.  of  James  Brown,  Oct. 
4,  1762.  She  d.  Sept.  12,  1766.  Ch.  :  I.  Lois,  b.  Oct.  17,  1756  ;  11. 
Caleb,  b.  July  11,  1758;  III.  Mary,  b.  June  25,  1763  ;  IV.  Alathea,  b. 
March  18,  1765. 

20.  Isaac,  son  of  Samuel,  (6,)  ra.  Anne,  dau.  of  Ebenezer  Frisbie  of 
Sharon,  Oct.  31,  1753.  She  d.  Dec.  3,  1766,  and  he  m.  Sarah  Smith, 
March  4,  1767,  who  d.  Feb.  12,  1783.  Ch.:  I.  David,  b.  Jan.  25, 
1755,— drowned,  May  10,  1773;  II.  Moses,  b.  Feb.  16,  1756,  d.  Dec. 
21,1773;  III.  Thaddeus,  b.  April  25,1757;  IV.  Leva,  b.  Sept.  27, 
1758,  d.  Jan.  15,  1775;  V.  Mesibah,  b.  Aug.  10,  1760,  d.  Sept.  23, 
1782  ;  VL  Abner,  b.  May  10,  1762  ;  VIL  V^ealthy,  b.  July  22,  1764  ; 
VIIL  Abraham,  b.  Aug.  2,  1766. 

21.  Amos,  son  of  John,  (8,)  m.  Dorcas,  dau.  of  Ebenezer  Warner, 
April  4,  1759.  She  d.  May  14, 1763,  and  he  ra.  2d,  Lois,  wid.  of  Ezekiel 
Scott,  Sept.  12,  1763.  Ch. :  L  Eunice,  b.  Feb.  23, 1760  ;  IL  Diana,  b. 
March  14,  1762,  d.  March  12,  1763;  IIL  Amos,  b.  May  3,  1764;  IV. 
John,b.  April  4, 1766  ;  V.  Edmund,  b.  June  7, 1768  ;  VI.  Lois,  b.  Dec.  31, 
1770;  Vn.  Djicas,b.Nov.  1, 1773.  d.  1774;  VIIL  Levi,  b.  July  3,1775. 

22.  Zebulon,  son  of  Obadiah,  (12,)  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Samuel 
Warner,  April  18,  1748,  and  d.  May  12,  1798.  His  wife  d.  June  21, 
1798,  aged  72.  Ch. :  L  Simeon,  b.  March  1,  1750;  IL  Huldah,  b. 
Nov.  7,  1753,  m.  John  Powers;  III.  Daniel,  b.  May  4,  1757,  d.  June 
10,  1762;  IV.  Justus,  went  to  Wallingford,  Vt.,  and  had  a  large 
family. 

23.  Enoch,  son  of  Obadiah,  (12,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Lieut.  Thos.  Por- 
ter, May  14,  1750.  Ch.:  L  Hannah,  b.  May  19,  1751 ;  II.  Eunice,  b. 
Oct.  15,  1752;  IIL  Enoch,  b.  Oct.  6,  1754;  IV.  Sarah,  b.  Sept.  2, 
1757;  V.  Uri,  b.  Aug.  2,  1759;  VL  Prue,  b.  April  6,  1761 ;  VIL  Es- 
ther, b.  Sept.  22,  1763;  VIIL  Mille,  b.  March  21,  1766;  IX.  Mark, 
b.  1758. 

24.  Ezekiel,  son  of  Obadiah,  (12.)  m,  Lois,  dau.  of  John  Fenn,  April 
13,  1758,  and  d.  Jan.  20,  1759.     Ch. :  I.  Ezekiel,  b.  Jan.  3,  1759. 

25.  Obadiah,  son  of  Obadiah,  (12,)  m.  Comfort,  dau.  of  Edmund 
Scott,  April  8,  1751.  She  d.  April,  1798.  He  d.  Sept.  1810.  Ch.  : 
I.  Annis,  b.  April  2,  1753  ;  II.  Mercy,  b.  July  2,  1755  ;  III.  Lydia,  b. 
Nov.  28,  1757;  IV.  Martha,  b.  Jan.  29,  1761;  V.  Sarah,  b.  Sept.  23, 
1763,  d.  Oct.  30,  1765  ;  VI.  Patience,  b.  June  21,  1766;  VIL  Edmund 
Andru>s,  b.  Oct.  17,  1771. 

26.  Benjamin,  son  of  William,  (13,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Obadiah  Ptich- 
ards,  Jan.  13,  1757.  Ch. :  L  Hannah,  b.  May  12,  1758 ;  H.  Mary,  b. 
Jan.  12,  1762 ;  IIL  Chloe,  b.  Feb.  18,  1767,  m.  Elijah  Terrel. 


APPENDIX.  531 

« 

27.  AsuLEv,  son  of  Samuel,  (14,)  m,  Martha,  dau.  of  Benjamin  Jud- 
son  of  Stratford,  April  25,  1787,  and  d.  May  15,  1842.  His  wid.  d. 
Dec.  1848,  aged  83.  Ch. :  I.Betsey,  b.  Dec.  29,  1787,  m.  James 
Street;  II.  "Catey,"  b.  Jan.  15,  1793,  m.  Miles  Morris,  and  d.  July  8, 
1837  ;  III.  Lewis,  b.  Dec.  14,  1796,  d.  1827  ;  IV.  Edmund,  b.  April  13, 
1799  ;  V.  Emma,  b.  June  28,  1801. 

28.  Stephen,  son  of  Stephen,  (17,)  m.  Freelove,  dau.  of  Amos  Hick- 
ox,  Nov.  30,  1758.  Ch. :  I.  Freelove,  b.  May  0,  1759  ;  II.  Rebecca,  b. 
Aug.  20,  1761  ;  III.  Stephen,  b.  April  23,  1763  ;  IV.  Uri,  b.  May  13, 
1765. 

29.  Eliphas,  son  of  Obadiah,  (18,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Gershom  Scott, 
Feb.  14,  1757.  Ch.:  I.  Nancy,  b.  Dec.  4,  1759;  II.  Jesse,  b.  Sept.  6, 
1762  ;  in.  Irene,  b.  Nov.  16,  1767  ;  IV.  JareJ,  b.  March  22,  1771. 

30.  Obadiah,  son  of  Obadiah,  (18,)  ni.  Hannah,  dau.  of  John  How, 
March  10,  1755.  Ch. :  I.  Hvnnah,  b.  Sept.  28,  1755  ;  11.  Olive,  b.  Sept. 
23,  1757  ;  III.  Lucy,  b.  July  26,  1760  ;  IV.  Jesse,  b.  May  2,  1763  ;  V. 
David,  b.  June  22,  1765;  VI.  Rose,  b.  Nov.  6,  1768. 

31.  Barnabas,  son  of  Obadiah,  (18,)  m.  Rebecca,  dau.  of  Doct. 
Ephraim  Warner,  Nov.  15,  1764.  She  d.  Sept.  22,  1773.  Ch.:  L 
Sabra,  b.  Jan.  14,  1766  ;  II.  Orpha,  b.  Nov.  10, 1767  ;  IH.  Margaret,  b. 
Dec.  5,  1769,  d.  in  infancy  ;  IV.  Margaret,  b.  Nov.  5,  1772. 

32.  Thaddeus,  son  of  Isaac,  (20,)  m.  Orange,  dau.  of  Thos.  Ham- 
mond, May  23,  1782.  She  d.  March  21,  182G.  Ch.  :  L  Levi,  b.  Oct. 
27,  1782  ;  H.  Moses,  b.  Feb.  28,  1785  ;  III.  Jacob,  b.  Feb.  20,  1786; 
IV.  Anna,  b.  Feb.  1,  1788,  d.  June  22, 1802  ;  V.  Philo,  b.  Oct.  6,  1790 ; 
VI.  Mabel,  b.  July  8,  1792,  d.  Oct.  24,  1803  ;  VIL  Moses,  b.  April  14, 
1795;  VIII.  Thaddeus,  b.  Oct.  19,  1797,  d.  Oct.  29,  1797;  IX.  Tru- 
man, b.  Nov.  4,  1798,  d.  Oct.  19,  1803  ;  X.  Isaac,  b.  May  8,  1801  ;  XL 
Bazaleel,  b.  May  1,  1803. 

33.  Abner,  son  of  Isaac,  (20,)  m.Aleathea,  dau.  of  John  Bradley  of  New 
Haven,  Feb.  5,  1783,  and  d.  March  13,  1812.  Ch. :  L  Lucy,  b.  Aug. 
29,  1785  ;  IL  Clary,  b.  Feb.  14,  1788  ;  IIL  Eldad,  b.  April  25,  1791  ; 
IV.  Deborah,  b.  Nov.  1,  1793;  V.  Alathea,  b.  April  2,  1796;  VL 
Wealthy,  b.  Oct.  7,  1798;  VIL  Phebe,  b.  April  6,  1801,  d.  Oct.  4, 
1805  ;  VIII.  Phebe  Elmira,  b.  Aug.  15,  1805  ;  IX.  Marcus,  b.  June  18, 
1807. 

34.  Simeon,  son  of  Zebulon,  (22,)  m.  Lucy,  dau.  of  Capt.  Abraham 
Hickox,  March  9,  1775,  and  d.  Aug.  28,  1828.  His  wid.  d.  Feb.  19, 
1829.  Ch. :  I.  Jemima,  b.  Nov.  21,  1775,  m.  David  Hungerford,  April 
2,  1804  ;  IL  Joel,  b.  May  15,  1777,  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Michael  Bron- 
son,  Feb.  15,  1796  ;  III.  Prue,  b.  Oct.  4,  1778,  d.  Sept.  12,  1780  ;  IV. 


532  HISTORY   OF   WATERBUKY. 

• 

Elizabeth,  b.  March  19,  1780;  V.  Daniel,  b.  March  1,  lY82  ;  VI.  Mark, 
b.  Sept.  30,  1783;  VII.  Titus,  b.  Sept.  7,  1785,  m.  Rhoda,  dau.  of  Na- 
thaniel Hall,  Dec.  1808;  VIII.  Jesse,  b.  June  10,  1787,  m.  Susan,  dau. 
of  David  Downs,  Aug.  7,  1811  ;  IX.  Prudence,  b.  March  7,  1789;  X. 
Linus  W.,  b.  March  27,  1791,  m.  Minerva,  dau.  of  James  Nichols,  Feb. 
8,  1818. 

35.  Uri,  son  of  Enoch,  (23,)  in.  Esther,  dau.   of  Abiel  Roberts,  Dec. 

26,  1780.  Ch. :  I.  Silas,  b.  July  22,  17«1 ;  II.  Rusha,  b.  Aug.  7,  1783  ; 
III.  Alpheus,  b.  Sept.  30,  1785. 

36.  Mark,  Titus  and  Jesse,  sons  of  Simeon,  (34,)  went  to  Springfield, 
Pa.  Mark  has  one  son  and  one  dau.,  Titus  two  sons  and  a  dau.,  and 
Jesse  six  sons. 

SCO  V  ILL. 

1.  Serg.  John  Scovill,  son  of  John  of  Waterbury  and  Haddam,  had 
ch.,  John,  b.  Jan.  1,  1694;  Obadiah,  b.  April  23,  1697  ;  Sarah,  b.  Oct. 
24,  1700;  William,  b.  Sept.  7,  1703  ;  Hannah,  b.  March  19,  1706-7  ; 
Edward,  b.  Feb.  10,  1710-1  J. 

2.  Lieut.  John,  son  of  John,  Jr.,  (1,)  had  ch.:  I.  Obadiah,  b.  Oct.  9, 
1725  ;  II.  Mary,  b.  March  31,  1727,  ra.  Andrew  Bronson  ;  IIL  John,  b. 
Nov.  24,  1729,  d.  young;  IV.  Asa,  b.  April  4, 1732  ;  Y.  Hannah,  b.  Jan. 
20,  1734-5,  m.  Jabez  Tuttle ;  VL  John,  b.  Oct.  27,  1738;  VIL 
Stephen,  b.  Aug.  19,  1740;  VIIL  Timothy,  b.  June  27,  1742;  IX. 
Annis,  b.  May  23,  1744  ;  X.  Annis,  m.  Nathaniel  Selkrigg. 

3.  Lieut.  William,  son  of  John,  Jr.,  (1,)  had,  I.  Anna,  b.  March  25, 
1731,  m.  Rev.  Eleazer  Prindle  and  d.  in   1789;  II.  Rev.  James,  b.  Jan. 

27,  1732-3  ;  IIL  Samuel,  b.  Nov.  4, 1735  ;  IV.  Abijah,  b  Dec.  27, 1738  ;' 
V.  William,  b.  Feb.  9,  1744-5;  VL  Darius,  b.  May  15,  1746,  m.,  had 
ch.  and  removed  to  the  State  of  N.  Y.  with  his  family.  His  son  Selah 
remained  in  Watertown  and  m.Sabrina  Foote — had  a  sun  Hubert,  who 
resides  in  Watertown  and  has  ch. 

4.  Edward,  son  of  John,  Jr.,  (1,)  had  ch.,  I.  Sarah,  b.  Feb.  25,  1740- 
1 ;  IL  Edward,  b.  Feb.  5,  1744-5,  m.  Ruth  Norton,  Nov.  26,  1770,  and 
d.  March  21, 1778. 

5.  Obadiah,  son  of  John,  (2,)  ra.  1st,  Hannah  Hull  of  Norwalk, 
July  14,  1752,  who  d.  Aug.  22,  1756,  and  he  m.  2d,  Hannah,  dau.  of 
Danl.  Porter,  June  11,  1760.  She  d.  June,  1766  and  he  d.  March  19, 
1768.  Ch. :  L  Sarah,  b.  Nov.  9,  1752;  IL  David,  b.  Jan.  26,  1756  ; 
DL  Anna,  b.  Feb.  4,  1761,  d.  April  9,  1781  ;  IV.  David,  b.  June  5, 
1762,  d.  March  19,  1768. 


APPENDIX.  633 

6.  Asa,  son  of  John,  (2,)  m.  Lois  Warner,  Dec.  10,  1755.  Ch. :  I. 
Selah,  b.  June  20,  1757;  II.  Amasa,  b.  Dec.  22,  1758;  III.  Selden,  b. 
July  6,  17G0;  IV.  Sarah,  b.  Nov.  1,  1766;  V.  Daniel;  VI.  Obadiah, 
ra.  Mille  Nichols,  Dec.  6,  1790. 

7.  John,  son  of  John,  (2,)  m.  Anna  Barnes,  Sept.  14,  1763,  and  d. 
Sept.  15,  1807.  Ch.:  I.  Truman,  b.  Feb.  24,  1764;  II.  Reuben,  b. 
Oct.  2,  1765  ;  III.  John,  b.  Feb.  17,  1768,  d.  same  year;  IV.  John,  b. 
Aug.  12,  1770,  d.  Oct.  10,  1830;  V.  Anne,  b.  Dec.  27,  1772;  VI. 
Clarissa,  b.  Feb.  24,  1776. 

8.  Timothy,  son  of  John,  (2,)  m.  Jemima,  dau.  of  Doct.  Danl.  Por- 
ter, April  7,  1762,  and  d.  June  22,  1824.  Ch. :  I.  Timothy,  b.  Nov. 
28,  1762;  II.  Noah,  b.  Jan.  27,  1765  ;  III.  Daniel,  b.  Dec.  12,  1766, 
d.  1767;  IV.  Jemima,  b.  Jan.  3,  1768,  d.  1783;  V.  Hannah,  b.  Dec. 
23,  1770;  VI.  Sylvia,  b.  Aug.  28,  1773;  VII.  Daniel,  b.  Nov.  6,  1775  ; 
VIII.  David,  b.  Jan.  4, 1780. 

9.  Rev.  James,  son  of  William,  (3,)  m.  Amy,  dau.  of  Capt.  George 
Nichols,  Nov.  7,  1762.  Ch. :  I.  James,  b.  March  19,  1764,  settled  in 
Waterbury ;  II.  William,  b.  1766,  m.  Ann  Davidson,  d.  in  1851  ;  III. 
Hannah,  b.  1768,  m.  Daniel  Michean  ?  and  d.  1846  ;  IV.  Rev.  Elias,  b. 
1771,  ra.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  William  Scovill,  and  d.  in  1841  ;  V.  Samuel, 
b.  1773,  m.  1st,  Deborah  Gilbert,  2d,  Mary  Smith;  VI.  Daniel,  b. 
1776;  VII.  Sarah,  b.  1777,  m.  Doct.  C.  Hathaway,  d.  in  1846;  VIII. 
Edward,  b.  1779,  ra.  Polly  Bates,  d.  1840;  IX.  Henry,  b.  1781,  ra. 
Mary  Cunningham. 

10.  Samuel,  son  of  William,  (3,)  ra.  Ruth,  dau.  of  Benjamin  Bron- 
son,  Dec.  19,  1756.  She  d.  Aug.  18,  1761,  and  he  m.  2d, Harts- 
horn, May  3,  1765.  Ch. :  I.  Anna,  b.  May  13,  1759;  II.  Ruth,  b. 
Aug.  12,  1761 ;  III.  Uri,  b.  1765,  m.  Melliscent,  dau.  of  Samuel  South- 

mayd,  Oct.  17,   1784,  who  d.  Oct.    1796.     Ch. :  1. ,  b.  Aug.  15, 

1785 ;  2.  Chester,  b.  1787  ;  3.  Southmayd,  b.  1789 ;  4.  Sarah,  b.  1791 ; 
5.    Ruth  Ann,  b.  1793;  6.  Geo.  Chester,  b.  1795. 

11.  William,  son  of  William,  (3,)  ra.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Samuel 
Brown,  Dec.  24,  1767,  and  d.  Aug.  13,  1827.  Ch. :  I.  Bethel,  b. 
June  6,  1769,  d.  1775;  II.  Elizabeth,  b.  July  31,  1771,  d.  1774;  III. 
William,  b.  Sept.  29,  1773  ;  IV.  Elizabeth,  m.  Rev.  Elias  Scovill ;  V. 
Samuel,  ra.  Ruthy  Langdon — lives  in  Watertown,  has  Sarah,  Mary  and 
William. 

12.  James,  son  of  Rev.  James,  (9.)  m.  Alathea,  dau.  of  ]\Iitchel  Lam- 
son  of  Woodbury,  Nov.  16,  1788,  and  d.  Nov.  26,  1825.  Ch.  :  L 
James  Mitchel  Larason,  b.  S^pt.  4,  1789,  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  William  H. 
Merriman,  Oct.    9,    1849  ;  ch.,    James    Mitchel    Lamson,   b.    Sept.    3, 


53i  HISTORY   OF   WATEEBUEY. 

1850;  Sarah  Alathea,  b.  Feb.  14,  1852;  Ilenry  William,  b.  Nov.  11, 
1853  ;  II.  Betsey,  b.  May  12,  1792,  m.  Sept.  10,  1809,  John  Bucking- 
ham;  III.  Sarah  H.,  b.  March  25,  1794,  m.  Aaron  Hitchcock,  in  1821 ; 
IV.  William  H.,  b.  July  27,  1796,  m.  1st,  Eunice  Davies  of  Ogdens- 
burg,  N.  Y.,  July  2,  1827,  who  d.  Nov.  25,  1839,  and- he  m.  2d,  Re- 
becca H.  Smith  of  New  Haven,  March  23,  1841,  and  d.  March  27, 
1854.  His  wid.  d.  Aug.  4,  1854.  Ch.,  Alathea  Ruth,  b.  March  21, 
1828,  m.  Frederick  J.  Kingsbury;  Mary  Ann,  b.  May  3,  1831  ;  Thomas 
John,  b.  June  9,  1833,  d.  May  22, 1839 ;  Sarah  IB,  b.  July  13,  1839,  d. 
Nov.  4,  1839;  William  Henry,  b.  Jan.  1,  1842  ;  James  Mitchel  Bam- 
son,  b.  June  15,  1843,  d.  Feb.  8,  1846  ;  Nathan  Smith,  b.  April  3,  1847, 
d.  May  22,  1849.  V.  Edward,  b.  Dec.  31,  1798,  m.  Harriet  Clark, 
Aug.  21,  1823  ;  VI.  Amy  M.,  b.  Feb.  9,  1801,  d.  April  30,  1804 ;  VII. 
Caroline,  b.  July  4,  1803,  m.  Rev.  William  Preston,  Oct.  1,  1842  ;  VIII. 
Maria  A.,  b.  Aug.  14,  1805,  m.  Hon.  Joel  Hinman,  1825  ;  IX.  Mary,  b. 
July  23,  1808,  m.  Rev.  Jocob  B.  Clark,  April  28,  1829,  and  d.  May  2, 
1842  ;  X.  Stella  Ann,  b.  May  19,  1811,  d.  Sept.  12,  1815. 

13.  Selah,  son  of  Asa,  (6,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Abial  Roberts,  Nov.  6, 
1784.  Ch. :  B  David,  b.  Sept.  6, 1787  ;  II.  Mark,  b.  July  24,  1789  ;  III. 
Ebenezer,  b.  Nov.  25,  1791. 

UPSON. 

1.  Thomas  Upson,  of  Hartford  and  Farmington,  had  ch.,  Thomas, 
Stephen,  Mary,  Hannah  and  Elizabeth. 

2.  Serg.  Stephen,  son  of  Thos.,  (1,)  had,  Mary,  Stephen,  Elizabeth, 
Thomas,  Hannah,  Tabiatha,  John  and  Thankful.     (See  p.  193.) 

3.  Stephen,  son  of  Stephen,  (2,)  had  ch.  :  B  Sarah,  b.  March  8,  1714, 
d.  1714;  II.  Sarah,  b.  July  26,  1715,  ra.  Gideon  Hickox,  Aug.  15, 
1734;  III.  Stephen,  b.  Dec.  9,  I7l7  ;  IV.  and  V.  Joseph  and  Benja- 
min, b.  Aug.  14,  1720  ;  VI.  Mary,  b.  May  2,  1724,  m.  Samuel  Porter, 
Dec.  9,  1747;  VII.  and  VIII.  Ebenezer  and  Thankful,  b.  Sept.  29, 
1727,  Ebenezer  d.  in  1749;  Thankful  m.  Ebenezer  Johnson,  Oct.  15, 
1756  ;  IX.  Jemima,  b.  April  8,  1730,  d.  in  1736  ;  X.  Hannah,  b.Sept. 
29,  1735,  m.  Jesse  Sperry,  May  8,  1759. 

4.  Thomas,  son  of  Stephen,   (2,)  had  ch. :  I.  Thomas,  b.  Dec,   20, 
719;  IB  and  III.  Mary  and  John,  b.  Jan.  21,  1721,— John  d.  1741 ; 

IV.  Josiah,  b.  Jan.  28,  1724-25;  V.  Asa,  b.  Nov.  30,  1728;  VB 
Timothy,  b.  Oct.  8,  1731 ;  VIB  Amos,  b.  March  17,  1734  ;  VIII.  Sam- 
uel, b.  March  8,  1737  ;  IX.  Freeman,  b.  July  24,  1739,  d.  1750. 

5.  John,  son  of  Stephen,  (2,)  had  ch. :  I.  Daniel,  b.  March  19,  1726  ; 
II.  Elijah,  b.  Feb.  11, 1727-28,  d.  young;  III.  Elijah,  b.  Feb.  5,  1730- 


APPENDIX.  635 

31,  d.  1732-33  ;  IV.  Hannah,  b.  Nov.  17,  1733,  ra.  Silas  Merriraan  ;  V. 
Martha,  b.  May  1,  1736,  m.  William  Barnes;  VI.  John,  b.  March  31, 
1739  ;   VII.  James,  b.  Nov.  4,  1742  ;  VIII.  Elijah,  b.  May  6,  1745. 

6.  Stephen,  Esq.,  son  of  Stephen,  (3,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Thomas 
Clark,  Jan.  14,  1749-50,  and  d.  March  27,  1769.  His  wid.  d.  Sept.  29, 
1813,  a.  90.  Ch.  :  I.  Mary,  b.  Nov.  21,  1750,  d.  Sept.  25,  1757  ;  II. 
Olive,  b.  Feb.  18,  1753,  ra.  Isaiah  Prichard ;  III.  Ebenezer,  b.  Aug.  11, 
1755,  d.  Sept.  20,  1757;  IV.  Stephen,  b.  Sept.  12,  1758,  was  shot  in 
N.  Y.  in  1776;  V.  Esther,  b.  Sept.  21,  1760,  m.  Asahel  Bronson,  Feb. 
12,1784;  VI.  Sarah,  b.  July  15,  1763,  m.  Stephen  Gilbert  of  South 
Salem,  N.Y.;  VII.  Mark,  b.  Feb.  21,  1766,  m.  Susanna  Allen,  and  d. 
July  19,  1820  ;  VIII.  Daniel,  b.  March  7,  1769. 

7.  Joseph,  son  of  Stephen,  (3,)  m.  Comfort,  dau.  of  Obadiah  Scott, 
Feb.  13,  1744-45,  and  d.  Aug.  7, 1749.  His  wid.  d.  Nov.  28,  1814,  a. 
91.  Ch.:  I.  Jemima,  b.  July  14,  1746,  m.  Moses  Cook,  Nov.  4,  1766  ; 
II.  Ezekiel,  b.  Oct.  7,  1748,  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Andrew  Bronson. 

8.  Bekjamin,  son  of  Stephen,  (3,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Dea.  Moses 
Blakeslee,  Nov.  17,  1743.  He  lived  in  Northbury.  Ch. :  I.  Paiel,  b. 
June  12,  1744,  m.  Deborah,  dau.  of  Samuel  Peck,  April  23,  1766  ;  II. 
Susanna,  b.  Jan.  12,  1746,  m.  Benj.  Gaylord,  and  d.  in  1818 ;  III.  Lois, 
b.  May  12,  1748,  m.  Israel  Terrel ;  IV.  Joseph,  b.  May  5,  1750,  m. 
Anna,  dau.  of  Thos.  Bronson,  Feb.  13,  1771  ;  V.  Benjamin,  b.  July  3, 
1752  ;  VI.  Jesse,  b.  Nov.  28,  1754,  d.  1755  ;  VII.  Jesse,  b.  May  25, 
1756;  VIII.  Noah,  b.  Sept.  26,  1758;  IX.  Asahel,  b.  April  25, 
1762,  m.  Mehitable,  dau.  of  Capt.  Thos.  Castle,  and  settled  in  Wolcott ; 
X.  Mary,  b.  June  22,  1765;  XL  Sarah,  b.  July  23,  1768. 

9.  Samuel,  son  of  Thomas,  (4,)  m.  Ruth .   Ch. :  I.  Mary,  b. 

Feb.  1759,  m.  Joseph  Minor  ;  II.  Archibald,  b.  April  26, 1761,  d.  1782  ; 
IIL  Isaac,  b.  Dec.  22, 1763  ;  IV.  Obed,  b.  Jan.  2,  1767;  V.  Harvey, 
b.  Nov.  11,  1769;  VL  and  VII.  Samuel  and  Ruth,  b.  Aug.  16,  1772  ; 
VIIL  Jerusha,  b.  June  27,  1775,  d.  1775;  IX.  Manly,  b.  March  12, 
1777;  X.  Betsey,  b.  Aug.  10,  1779. 

10.  Mark,  son  of  Stephen,  (6,)  had  ch. :  I.  Olive,  m.  Joseph  Blakeslee, 
II.  Esther;  III.  Sarah,  d.  unm. ;  IV.  Lucena,  m.  William  Stowe ;  V. 
Lucius,  d.  aged  about  62  ;  VI.  Rosetta,  d.  unm. ;  VII.  Jesse,  m.  Esther 
L.  Hotchkiss,  resides  in  Waterbury  ;  VIII.  Sarah  Ann ;  IX.  Davis,  d. 
aged  22. 

11.  Daniel,  son  of  Stephen,  (6,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Samuel  Adams. 
She  d.  June  29,  1830,  and  he  m.  wid.  Phebe  Kirtland  of  Woodbury, 
Sept.  4,  1831,  who  d.  May  4,  1845.  He  d.  Oct.  1,  1654.  Ch. :  I. 
Stephen,  b.  May  8,  1797,  d.  Dec.  6,  1822  ;  H.  Alvin,  b.  Dec.  4,  1798. 


636  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

m.  Mary  Sperry,  and  lives  in  Mich.;  III.  Daniel,  b.  May  16,  1801,  m. 
Nancy  Hotcbkiss — no  ch.,  lives  in  Watertown ;  IV.  Minerva,  b.  March 
10,  1803,  d.  June  6,  1822;  V.  Polly  Maria,  b.  Dec.  29, 1805,  d.  Jan. 
19,  1807;  VI.  William,  Nov.  1,  1807,  lives  in  Middlebiiry,  unm.;  VII. 
Merlin,  b.  Feb.  28,  1810,  m.  Emily  Beecher  of  Naugatuck, — residence, 
W^oodbury ;  VIII.  Sarah  Maria,  b.  Nov.  19,  1813,  m.  David  Summers, 
lives  in  Woodbury;  IX.  Thomas  Clark,  b.  Dec.  20,  1819,  ra.  1st, 
Harriet  Morris  of  Woodbury,  Avho  d.  July  12,  1853,  and  m.  2d,  Cor- 
nelia Pease  of  Vt.,  lives  in  Waterbury. 

12.  Benjamin,  son  of  Benjamin,  (8,)  m.Mary,  wid.  of  Thomes  Clark, 
Jan.  24,  1780,  and  d.  July,  1824.  His  wife  d.  June  13,  1816.  Ch.  :  I. 
Stephen,  b.  June  12,  1783.     (See  p.  443.) 

13.  Thomas,  son  of  Thomas  of  Farmington,  (4,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of 
Capt.  Timothy  Hopkins,  May  28,1749.  She  d.  June  6,  1757.  He 
d.  Sept.  5,  1764.  Ch. :  I.  Benoni,  (see  p.  443,)  b.  Feb.  14,  1750,  m. 
Leva  Hopkins;  II.  Charles,  b.  March  8,  1752  ;  III.  Sylvia,  b.  June  7, 
1756,  d.  1764. 

14.  Charles,  son  of  Thomas,  (13,)  m.  Wealthy  Hopkins,  May  26, 1773, 
and  d.  April  29,  1809.  His  wid.  d.  Dec.  28,1783.  Ch. :  I.  Wash- 
ington, b.  Sept.  2,  1775,  d.  April  15,  1813  ;  11.  Lee,  b.  May  7,  17  78; 
IIL  Gates,  b.  July  18,  1780. 

15.  Reuben  Upson,  son  of  John,  and  grandson  of  John?  (5,)  m.  Han- 
nah, dau,  of  Nathaniel  Richardson,  Dec.  25,  1798.  Ch. :  I.  Reuben,  b. 
Aug.  28,  1799,  d.  May  12,  1802;  II.  Phebe,  Oct.  13,  1801,  and  pro- 
bably others. 

WARNER. 

1.  JoH.v  Warner,  of  Hartford  and  Farmington,  had  ch. :  John 
Daniel,  Thomas  and  Sarah. 

2.  John,  son  of  John  (1,)  (see  p.  195,)  had  Ephraim,  John,  Robert, 
(see  Cothren's  Woodbury,  p.  752,)  Ebenezer  and  Lydia. 

3.  Daniel,  son  of  John,  (1,)  had  Daniel,  John,  Abigail,  Samuel  and 
Thomas.     (See  p.  198.) 

4.  Thomas,  (see  p.  198,)  sou  of  John,  (1,)  had,  Benjamin,  John, 
Mary,  Martha,  Thomas,  Samuel  and  Margaret. 

5.  Doct.  EphraIxM,  (see  p.  196,)  son  of  John,  (2,)  had,  I.  Margaret, 
b.  Feb.  16, 1693,  d.  March,  1693  ;  IL  Ephraim,  b.  Oct.  29,  1695,  d.  Dec. 
28,  1704;  IIL  Benjamin,  b.  Sept.  30,  1698;  IV.  John,  b.  June  24, 
1700;  V.  Obadiah,  b.  Feb.  24,  1702-3;  VL  Esther;  VH.  Ephraim; 
VIII.  Ebenezer. 

6.  Doct.  John,  (see  p.  196,)  son  of  John,  (2,)  had,  L  A  dau.,  b.  July 


APPENDIX.  537 

22,  1699  ;  II.  Rebecca,  b.  Nov.  24, 1703,  m.  Samuel  Thomas  of  Wood- 
bury;  III.  Ebenezer,  b.  June  24,  1705;  IV.  Lydia,b.  Feb.  23, 1V06-V; 
V.  John,  b.  in  Stratford,  March  31,  1717. 

7.  Daniel,  son  of  Daniel,  (3,)  had,  I.  A  son,  d.  young;  II.  A  son,  b. 
and  d.  March,  1795-6  ;  III.  Samuel,  b.  April  16,  1798;  IV.  Sarah,  b. 

Jan.  3,   1704-5,  m. Huff;  V.  Ebenezer,  b.  April  11,  1706;  VI. 

Abraham,  b.  Nov.  16,  1708  ;  VII.  Abigail,  b.  Feb.  10,  1710-11 ;  VIII. 
Mary,  b.  July  16,  1712,  m.  Isaac  Tuttle  of  Woodbury,  April  15,  1731. 

8.  Samuel,  son  of  Thomas,  (4,)  had,  I.  and  II.  twins,  d.  young  ;  III. 
Mary,  b.  July  5,  1718,  m.  Robert  Drakely  of  W^ood bury,  July  14, 1751 ; 
IV.  Sarah,  b.  Sept.  1720,  m.  Timothy  Warner;  V.  Thomas,  b.  June 
22,  1722,  ra.  Huldah  Warner,  and  d.  without  issue;  VI.  Benjamin,  b. 
Oct.  22,  1724,  d.  April  22,  1760;  VII.  and  VIII.  Thankful  and  Pa- 
tience, b.  March  10,  1727;  Thankful  ra.  Thomas  Hammond;  IX.  Han- 
nah, b.  Aug.  20,  1729,  m.  Abraham  Adams;  X.  Stephen,  b.  Sept.  30, 
1731,  m.  Fhebe  Baldwin;  XL  Phebe,  b.  Feb.  6,  1735-6,  m.  Wait 
Wooster  ;  XII.  Martha,  b.  July  21,  1738  or  1739,  m.  Charies  Warner. 

9.  Doct.  Benjamin,  son  of  Ephraim,  (5,)  ra.  Haniiah,  dau.  of  Josiah 
Strong  of  Colchester,  March  17,  1720,  and  d.  April,  1772  ;  his  wife  d. 
April,  1785,  aged  85.  Ch. :  I.  Josiah,  b.  April  10,  1721,  m.  Rebecca 
Brown;  II.  Dinah,  b.  Feb.  11,  1723,  m.  Benj.  Harrison;  HI.  Reuben, 
b.  Oct.  12,  1725,  d.  March  28,  1727  ;  IV.  Margaret,  b.  Nov.  9,  1727, 
m.  Oliver  W^elton  ;  V.  Reuben,  b.  Sept.  21,  1729  ;  VI.  David,  b.  Nov. 
27,  1731,  m.  Abigail  Harrison;  VII.  Benjamin,  b.  Jan.  26,  1734; 
YIII.  Anna,  b.  Jan.  31,  1736,  ra.  John  Hickox,  Jr.;  IX.  Ephraim,  b. 
June  26,  1738,  m.  Lydia,  dau.  of  Samuel  Brown,  March  30,  1760,  and 
d.  May  20, 1808,— wife  d.  July  20,  1815— no  issue;  X.  Eunice,  b.Aug. 
2,  1740,  in.  John  Hickox  3d  ;  XL  Aid,  b.  Nov.  1,  1742,  m.  Elizabeth 
Porter. 

10.  Dea.  John,  son  of  Ephraim,  (5,)  m.  Esther,  dau.  of  David  Scott, 
Dec.  17,  1724.  She  d.  Feb.  18,  1726,  and  he  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Thomas 
Hickox,  Oct.  3,  1728,  who  d.  in  1784.  He  d.  Sept.  7,  1794.  Ch. :  L 
Esther,  b.  Sept.  11,  1729,  d.  Sept.  4,  1730;  H.  Phebe,  b.  Jan.  8, 1732  ; 
IIL  Annis,  b.  Jan.  3,  1735;  IV.  James,  b.  Dec.  11,  1739,  ra.  Eunice 
Dutton;  V.  Mary,  b.  Oct.  9,  1742,  d.  April  21,  1745;  VL  Elijah,  b. 
March  21,  1746;  VH.  John,  b.  Oct.  14,  1749,  ra.  Anne  Sutliff. 

11.  Obadiah,  son  of  Ephraim,  (5,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Joseph  Lewis, 
Feb.  1,  1726-7.  Ch. :  '.  Jerusha,  b.  Oct.  13,  1727,  ra.  Aaron  Harri- 
son; IL  Lydia,  b.  June  6,  1729;  IIL  Obadiah,  b.  June  20,  1731,  d. 
June  25,  1750  ;  IV.  Esther,  b.  Nov.  9,  1733,  d.  Feb.  1746  ;  V.  Joseph, 
b.   Oct.  23,  1735;  VL  Lois,  b.  Mirch  30,  1733,  m.  Asa   Scovil  ;   VIL 


538  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURT. 

Enos,  b.  Aug.  11,  1740,  d.  Sept.  1,  1749;  VIII.  Sarah,  b.  Feb.  21, 
1742-3,  ra.  Aaron  Terrel ;  IX.  Eleanor,  b.  Jan.  13,  1743-4,  m.  Samuel 
Hickox;  X.  Agnis,  *b.  Feb.  24,  1747;  XT.  Irena,  b.  July,  1749,  m. 
Abijab  Warner;  XII.  Mary,  b.  Aug.  6,  1751. 

12.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Ephraim,  (5,)  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Thos. 
Bronson,  April  2,  1740,  and  d.  Oct.  5,  1805,  aged  94.  Ch.:  I.  Noah, 
b.  Nov.  21,  1740,  d.  April  6,  1759  ;  II.  Ebenezer,  b.  Sept.  17,  1742,  d. 
Dec.  21,1746;  III.  Margaret,  b.  Oct.  6,  1744,  m.  Richard  Wei  ton ; 
IV.  Ebenezer,  b.  Jan.  16,  1748,  d.  Aug.  13,  1750  ;  V.  Jemima,  b.  Nov. 
5,  1749,  d.  Nov.  7,  1751;  VI.  Annis,  b.  March  21,  1752;  VII.  Eliza- 
beth, b.  March  17,  1754,  m.  Ard  Welton,  d.  1827;  VIII.  Justus,  b. 
March  27,  1756,  m.   Rena  Warner,  went  to  Ohio  and  d.  in  Liverpool, 

O.,  April  16,  1856  ;  IX.  Mark,   b.  Dec.  22,  1757,  m. Foote,  d.  in 

1815  ;  X.  Jemima,  b.  May  17,  1761. 

13.  Ephraim,  son  of  Ephraim,  (5,)  m.  Eleanor,  dau.  of  Wm.  Smith, 
of  Farmington,  Feb.  14,  1739,  and  d.  Nov.  5,  1768.  Ch. :  I.  William,  b. 
Sept.  13,  1740,  m.  Mary  Chambers;  II.  Abijah,  b.  Jan.  5,  1743,  m. 
Rena  Warner;  III.*  Rebecca,  b.  June  15,  1745,  m.  Barnabas  Scott; 
IV.  Epha,  b.  April  29,  1748,  m.  Elizabeth  Perkins  of  New  Haven;  V. 
Seth,  b.   Oct.  4,  1750,  d.  Oct.   23,  1751  ;  VI.  Seth,  b.  Jan.  5,  1753  ; 

VII.  Eleanor,  b.  Sept.  28,  1757  ;  VIII.  Esther,  b.  May  30,  1760. 

14.  Ebenezer,  son  of  John,  (6,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Richard  Welton, 
Jan.  22,  1729,  and  d.  Feb.  16,  1750.  She  d.  April  7,  1747.  Ch. :  I. 
Stephen,  b.  June  25,  1730,  d.  Feb.  24,  1750;  II.  Dorcas,  b.  July  1, 
1732,  m.  Amos  Scott;  III.  Phebe,  b.  Aug.  1,  1735;  IV.  John,  b. 
March  10,  1739,  d.  Nov.  8,  1750. 

15.  John,  son  of  John,  (6,)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Moses  Bronson,  Oct. 
26,  1743.  He  d.  before  Dec.  2,  1760.  Ch. :  I.  Ellen,  b.  Sept.  2,  1744, 
d.  Sept.  20,  1746  ;  II.  Ellen,  b.  Oct.  23,  1746  ;  III.  Bela,  b.  Sept.  20, 
1748;  IV.  Ebenezer,  b.  Aug.  15,  1750. 

16.  Samuel,  son  of  Daniel,  (7,)  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Edmund  Scott, 
Dec.  21,  1719.  Ch.:  I.  Daniel,  b.  Aug.  27,  1720,  d.  at  Cape  Breton  ; 
II.  Timothy,  b.  July  26, 1722  ;  HI.  Nathan,  b.  July  6,  1724  ;  IV.  Eliz- 
abeth, b.  March  26,  1726,  m.  Zebulon  Scott;  V.  Thomas;  VI.  Nathan, 
b,  Dec.  25,  1729;  VII.  Abigail,  b.  Nov.   15,  1732,  m.  George  Scott; 

VIII.  Huldah,  b.  May  17,  1734,  m.  1st,  Thos.  Warner,  2d,  Saml.  Wil- 
liams; IX.  Enos,  b.  June  14,  1736;  X.  Susanna,  b.  Aug.  3,  1738,  ra. 
Ephraim  Bissel,  Nov.  5,  1756  ;  XI.  Samuel,  b.  Jan.  10,  1742,  m.  Anne 
Camp. 

17.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Daniel,  (7,)  m.  Martha,  wid.  of  Edmund  Scott 
and  dau.  of  John  Andruss,  April    18,  1734.     Ch. :  Jemima,   b.  July  2, 


APPENDIX.  539 

1735  ;  II.  Benajah,  b,  Jan.  IV,  1738,  d.  1741  ;  III.  Benajah,  b.  Jan. 
8,  1742. 

18.  Abraham,  son  of  Daniel,  (7,)  m.  Keziah,  dau.  of  Richard  Wel- 
ton,  Dec.  12,  1734,  and  d.  Nov.  23,  1749.  Ch. :  I.  Charles,  b.  Jan.  18, 
1736.  m.  Martha  Warner;  II.  Levi,  b.  March  16,  1738;  III.  Ziibah, 
b.  July  12,  1740  ;  IV.  Keziah,  b.  Oct.  6,  1742  ;  V.  Sylvia,  b.  May  18, 
1745;  VI.  Daniel,  b.  April  18,  1748. 

19.  Stephex,  son  of  Samuel,  (8,)  ra.  Phebe,  dau.  of  James  Baldwin 
of  Derby,  Nov.  13,  1754.  Ch. :  I.  Melliscent,  b.  Oct.  27,  1755;  II. 
Roxanna,  b.  April  13,  1757 ;  III.  Bade,  b.  July  6,  1761 ;  IV.  Diana,  b. 
Jan.  4,  1764;  V.  Anna,  b.  Nov.  11,  1765;  VI.  Arba,  b.  April  13, 
1768;  VII.  Reuben,  b.  Oct.  11,  1773. 

20.  JosiAH,  son  of  Dact.  Benjamin,  (9,)  m.  Rebecca,  dau.  of  James 
Bronson,  May  26,  1748,  and  d.  Aug.  26,  1750.  His  wid.  d.  Jan.  5, 
1756.     Ch.  :  I.  Ozias,  b.  Aug.  21,  1749,  m.  Tamer  Nichols. 

21.  David,  son  of  Doct.  Benjamin,  (9,)  in.  Abigail,  dau.  of  Benj. 
Harrison,  Dec.  11,  1753.  Ch :  I.  Josiah,  b.  Oct.  6,  1754,  m.  Anne 
Prichard;  II.  Aaron,  b.  Nov.  24,  1756,  m.  Lydia  Welton ;  HI.  Ura- 
nia, b.  Oct.  1,  1758  ;  IV.  James  H.,  b.  Dec.  18,  1760  ;  V.  Benjamin, 
b.  Nov.  17,  1762. 

22.  AtiD,  son  of  Doct.  Benjamin,  (9,)  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Doct. 
Daniel  Porter,  Jan.  12,  1764,  and  d.  April  30,  1824.  His  wid.  d.  Aug. 
21,  1835,  aged  90.  Ch. :  I.  Joanna,  b.  1764,  m.  Samuel  Gunn,  had 
several  ch.  and  d.  in  Ohio;  II.  Lydia,  b.  1766,  m.  Samuel  Alcox,  lived 
in  Wolcott;  III.  Ephraim,  b.  1768,  was  drowned  1786;  IV.  Elizabeth, 

b.  1769,  m. Osborn,  went  to  Black  River;  V.  Prudence,  b.  1772, 

removed  to  Camden,  N.  Y. ;  VI.  David,  b.  1774  ;  VII.  Irena,  b.  1775, 
ra.  twice,  is  living  in  Pa. ;  VIIL  Ard,  b.  1777  ;  IX.  Hannah,  b.  1780, 
m.  Anson,  son  of  Ozias  Warner ;  X.  Asahel,  b.  1782;  XL  Chauncey, 
b.  1785,  resides  in  Fulton,  Ohio,  has  ch. ;  XIL  Susan,  b.  1789,  m. 
Levi,  son  of  Ozias  Warner. 

23.  James,  son  of  Dea.  John,  (10,)  m.  Eunice,  dau.  of  David  Dutton, 
Jan.  1,  1761,  and  d.  May  27,  1819.  His  wife  d.  May  7,  1815.  Ch.  : 
I.  Sarah,  b.  Oct.  2,  1761  ;  II.  Noah,  b.  Aug.  1763,  d.  Sept.  18,  1820  ; 
IIL  Lucinda,  b.  Sept.  20,  1765,  m.  Elijah  Hotchkiss  ;  IV.  Eunice,  b. 
April  3,  1769,  d.  Aug.  30,  1769;  V.  James,  b.  Jan.  25,  1771,  d.  Jan. 
15,  1773  ;  VL  Eunice,  b.  May  31,  1773,  m.  Eli  Terry;  VH.  James,  b. 
Nov.  1,  1775. 

24.  Elijah,  son  of  Dea.  John,  (10,)  in.  Esther,  dau.  of  Thos.  Fenn, 
Nov.  19, 1767.   Ch. :  L  Lyman,  b.  May  22,  1768  ;  II.  Chauncey,  b.  June 


'64:0  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUET. 

11,  1770,  m.  A.  Tallmage;  III.  Rosetta,  b.  Feb.  25,  1773  ;  IV.  Elijah; 
V.  Apollos,  m.  Cbloe  Wilcox  of  Simsbury. 

25.  John,  son  of  Dea.  Jobn,  (10,)  m.  Anne,  dau.  of  Dea.  John  Sutliff, 
Sept.  22,  1773.  Ch. :  I.  Chloe,  m.  Enos  Dutton ;  II.  Martha,  b.  Jan.  24, 
1775,  m.  Victory  Tomlinson  ;  III.  Eliel,  b.  Oct.  1776,  m.  Amanda  0^born ; 

IV.  Aaron,  b.  1780,  ra.  Polly  Camp,  d.  1839  ;  V.  Abijah,  b.  1784,  m. 
Betsey  Fenn;  VI.  David,  b.  1786,  m.  Anne  Atwater;  VII.  John  S.,  b. 
1789,  m.  Emily  Lord  ;  VIII.  Anne,b.  July  20,  1792,  m.  A.  G.  V^elton. 

26.  Joseph,  son  of  Obadiah,  (11,)  m.  Elizabeth,  dau.  of  Ebenezer 
Wakely,  Jan.  13,  1763,  who  d.  in  1767,  and  he  m.  Huldah  Nichols. 
Ch.:  I.  Sarah,  b.  Nov.  6,  1763,  d.  young;  11.  Joseph,  b.  May  12,  1765, 
d.  Sept.  14,  1845  ;  III.  Sarah,  b.  April,  1767  ;  IV.  Obadiah,  b.  1770,  d. 
Sept.  14,  1845. 

27.  Abijah,  son  of  Ephraim,  (13,)  m.  Rene,  dau.  of  Obadiah  Warner, 
Dec.  13,  1764.  Ch.:  I.  Garmon,  b.  Aug.  2,  1765;  II.  Lucy,  b.  Oct. 
23,  1766;    III.  Agnis,  b.  Dec.  25,  1769;  IV.  Rene,  b.  Oct.  10,  1771  ; 

V.  Rebecca,  b.  Feb.  24,  1773. 

28.  AViLLiAM,  son  of  Ephraim,  (13,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Thos.  Cham- 
bers, Dec.  8,  1762  ;  Ch. :  I.  Austin,  b.  Dec.  18,  1764  ;  II.  Loretta,  b.  Jan. 
30,  1767;  probably  others. 

29.  TiMOTHV,  son  of  Samuel,  (16.)  m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Samuel  Warner, 
Feb.  25,  1745;  Ch. :  I.  Naomi,  b.  Jan.  4,  1746,  m.  Samuel  Webb;  II. 
Mindwell,  b.  Aug.  14,  1749;  III.  Rosanna,  b.  Aug.  1,  1753  ;  IV.  Lucy, 
b.  Nov.  9,  1655;  V.  Jesse,  b.  Nov.  12,  1757  ;  VL  Rene,  b.  Nov.  1, 
1759;  VII.  Consider,  b.May  9,  1762. 

30.  Samuel,  son  of  Samuel,  (16,)  m.  Anne,  dau.  of  Abel  Camp,  May  6, 
1760.  Ch. :  L  Levinia,  b.  Sept.  16,  1761;  IL  Antha,  b.  Sept.  25, 
1764  ;  IIL  Bede,  b.  July  5,  1766;  IV.  Thankful,  b.  July  8,  1768. 

31.  Charles,  son  of  Abraham,  (18,)  m.  Martha,  dau.  of  Samuel  Warner, 
April  2,  1759.  Ch. :  L  Orpha,  b.  June  11,  1760,  d.  June25, 1760  ;  IL 
Orrin,  b.  May  1,  1762  ;  IIL  Lucena,  b.  April  12,  1764;  IV.  Levi,  b. 
Nov.  22,  1766;  V.  Asa,  b.  July  15,  1769. 

32.  OziAS,  son  of  Josiah,  (20,)  m.  Tamer,  dau.  of  Richard  Nichols,  Oct. 
9, 1770.  Ch. :  L  Rena,  b.  April  16,  1771 ;  IL  Eunice,  b.  April  2, 1773  ; 
IIL  James,  b.  Oct.  18,  1774;  IV.  Anson,  b.  Aug.  9,  1778  ;  V.  Tamer, 
b.  Aug.  13,  1780;  VL  Lydia,  b.  March  14,  1782  ;  VIL  David,  b.  Feb. 
20,  1784;  VIIL  Levi,  b.  Feb.  14,  1786,  ra.  Susan,  dau.  of  Ard  War- 
ner, removed  to  Springville,  Penn.,  has  a  large  family. 

33.  JosiAH,  son  of  David,  (21,)  m.  Anna,  dau.  of  Roger  Priohard, 
Jan.  6,  1774.  Ch. :  L  David,  b.  Aug.  17,  1774  ;  II.  Anne,  b.  Sept.  1, 
1776;  IIL  Polly,  b.  Oct.  5,  1779;  IV.  Anna,  b.  June  1,  1781,— per- 
haps others. 


APPENDIX.  541 

34.  David,  son  of  Ard,  (22,)  m.  Louis  Sutliff  wid.  of  Ira  Tompkins. 
Ch. :  I.  Amanda,  b.  1810,  m.  John  B.  Terry,  of  Bristol ;  II.  Vienna,  b 
1815,  m.  and  resides  in  East  Haddam ;  III.  Betsey,  b.  1718,  m.  Reuben 
Tyler. 

35.  Ard,  son  of  Ard,  (22,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Seba  Bronson.  Ch. :  I. 
Maria,  m.  lives  in  Ohio;  II.  Mary,  m.  Gen.  David  B.  Hurd ;  ch.,  Mary 
M.,  Elizabeth  J.,  Margaret  L.,  Hellen  N.,  and  Caroline ;  III.  Elizabeth, 
m.  Danl.  Barheller,  resided  in  111.,  d.  Nov.  1855;  IV.  Nancy,  m., 
lived  in  Illinois, — is  deceased  ;  V.  Sherman  B.,  ni.  Lydia  Hall  of 
Southbury,  has  one  ch.,  Arthur  0.;  VI.  Charles  A.,  m.  Mary  Ann 
Thomas  of  Bethany — has  ch. ;  VII.  Maria,  m.  Col.  Levi  Bolster  of 
Maine ;  ch.,  Edwin  S.,  Juliett  M.,  Horatio  A.,  Mary  H.,  Jane  E.,  M. 
Harriet ;  VIII.  Abram  J.,  graduated  at  Trinity  Coll.,  Hartford, — is  an 
Episcopal  clergyman  in  111. 

36.  AsAHEL,  son  of  Ard,  (22,)  m.  Lowly  Andruss.  Ch.:  I.  Anna,  m. 
C.  Case,  went  to  Syracuse,  N.  Y. — has  ch.;  II.  Chauncey,  resides  in 
Syracuse,  has  been  married  twice ;  III.  Sarah  Jane,  m.  Sumner  Van- 
hosen  of  Cliicopee,  Mass. — has  ch. ;  IV.  Wolcott,  enlisted,  went  to  Mex- 
ico and  has  not  been  heard  of  since  the  taking  of  Vera  Cruz. 

37.  Ansox,  son  of  Ozias,  (32,)  ra.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Ard  Warner,  (22,) 
Ch. :  I.  Ei>hraim,m.  Mary  Whitney — both  dead — left  a  dau. ;  II.  Charity, 
m.  Chauncey  Royce  of  Bristol — has  four  ch.;  IIL  G.  Porter,  m.  Eunice 
Terrell  and  had  3  ch.;  IV.  Emeline  J.,  m.  Charles  Ball  of  Southington, 
has  ch.  ;  V.  Charlotte  H.,  m.  1st,  Wm.  Thompson,  2d,  H.  Bronson,  of 
Prospect. 

WELTON. 

1.  JoFiN  Welton  (see  p.  200)  had  ch. :  John,  Stephen,  Abigail, 
Mary,  Elizabeth,  Else,  Richard,  Hannah,  Thomas,  George  and  Esther. 
Stephen  had  no  sons,  Thomas  but  one,  who  d.  young.  In  the  following, 
the  descendants  of  John,  Richard  and  George  are  given  separately. 

First  Family,  or  John's  Posterity. 

2.  John,  son  of  John,  (1,)  had,  L  John,  b.  June  28,  1707;  H.  Eze- 
kiel,  b.  March  4,  1709,  went  to  Nova  Scotia;  III.  George,  b.  Aug.  16, 
1711  ;  IV.  Ebenezer,  b.  Aug.  31,  1713  ;  V.  Mary,  b.  Jan.  26,  1716,  d. 
young;  VL  Thomas,  b.  Feb.  23,  I7l8;  VII.  Mary,  b.  Oct.  10,  1722; 
VIIL  Oliver,  b.  Dec.  14,  1724  ;  IX.  Silence,  b.  Dec.  24,  1727. 

3.  John,  son  of  John,  (2,)  m.  Elizabeth  Hendrick  of  Fairfield,  Feb. 
12,  1739.  Ch.:  I.  Lois,  b.  May  9,  1744  ;  H.  LuH;  b.  March  9,  1748,  d. 
1749. 


642  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUET. 

4.  Ebenezer,  son  of  John,  (2,)  had,  I.  Nathaniel,  b.  April  4,  1742,  d. 
April  23,  1777  ;  II.  Sarah,  b.  Dec.  5,  1744;  III.  Mercy,  b.  Sept.  15, 
1747;  IV.  Ebenezer,  b.  July  14,  1750;  V.  David,  b.  July  27,  1752, 
d.  1757  ;  VI.  Phebe,  b.  April  11,  1755  ;  VII.  David,  b.  June  5,  1760. 

5.  Nathaniel,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (4,)  m.  Martha,  dau.  of  Thomas  Tat- 
tle of  New  Haven,  Feb.  6,  1764.  Ch.:  I.  Sarah,  b.  March  10,  1765  ; 
11.  Ilezekiah,  b.  Nov.  30,  1766  ;  III.  Uri,  b.  June  30,  1768;  IV.  Na- 
thaniel, b.  March  10,  1770;  V.  Jarvis,  b.  Feb.  26,  1772  ;  VI.  Allen,  b. 
March  11,  1774  ;  VII.  Elias,  b.  July  18,  1776. 

6.  Hezekiah,  son  of  Nathaniel,  (5,)  m.  Hannah,  dau.  of  Levi  Welton, 
had  ch., — went  West. 

7.  Nathaniel,  son  of  Nathaniel,  (5,)  had,  Horace;  Laura,  m.  John 
Hotchkiss  ;  Charry  ;  Maria,  m.  Freeman  Sanford  ;  Garry. 

8.  Horace,  son  of  Nathaniel,  (7,)  m.  1st,  Julia,  dau.  of  Asahel 
Finch,  2d,  Susan  Hilchcock.  Ch. :  L  Edwin,  b.  June  26,  1824;  IL 
Augustus,  b.  March  16,1826;  IIL  James,  b.  March  16,  1829;  IV. 
Julia,  b.  Dec.  23,  1733;  V.  David,  b.  Dec.  26,  1835;  VL  Stella,  b. 
March  9,  1837;  VII.  Nelson,  b.  Oct.  17,  1841;  VIIL  Mary,  b.  Dec. 
14,  1841 ;  IX.  William,  b.  Sept.  28,  1849  ;  X.  Ellen,  b.  March  22,  1852. 

9.  James,  son  of  Horace,  (8,)  m.  Augusta  Boyd  of  Simsbury.  Ch. : 
Georgiana  and  Adella. 

10.  Garry,  son  of  Nathaniel,  (7,)  had  Eliza  and  Nelson. 

11.  David,  son  of  Ebenezer,  (4,)  tn.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Jabez  Tuttle, 
June  20,  1781.  Ch. :  I.  Daniel,  b.  Nov.  19,  1781  ;  H.  Jabez,  b.  May 
30,  1783;  III.  David,  b.  June  27,1785;  IV.  Hannah,  b.  Sept.  18, 
1789;  V.  Lucina,  m. Osborn. 

12.  Daniel,  son  of  David,  (II,)  m.  Susanna  Selkriggs,  and  had 
William,  George,  Annis,  Sarah  and  Mary. 

13.  George,  son  of  Daniel,  (12,)  m.  Charlotte  Smith,  and  had  Sarah, 
George  and  Daniel. 

14.  Jabez,  son  of  David,  (11.)  m.  Betsey  Moore  of  New  Haven. 
Ch.:  L  Ebenezer,  b.  Nov.  22,  1805;  IL  Rebecca,  b.  Jan.  27,  1809,  m. 
1st,  Tyler  Bronson,  2d,  Lucius  Beach;  III.  David,  b.  Aug.  26,  1812; 
IV.  Polly,  b.  Sept.  1814,  m.  1st,  Cornelius  Munson,  2d,  Marvin  Minor; 
V.Francis,  b.  Jan.  26,  1717. 

15.  Ebenezer,  son  of  Jabez,  (14,)  m.  Mary  Rice,  and  had  Charles. 

16.  David,  son  of  Jabez,  (14,)  m.  Huldah  Bronson.  Ch. :  Frances 
E.,  David  F.  and  Albert  B. 

17.  Francis,  son  of  Jabez,  (14,)  m.  Lucretia,  dau.  of  Ozias  Hubbard 
of  Guilford.    Ch.:  Isidora  L.,  b,  Jan.  4, 1848  ;  Ann  C,  b.  Oct,  14,  1858. 

18.  Thomas,  son  of  John,  (2,)  m,  Mary,  dau,  of  R,  Cossett  of  Simsbury, 


APPENDIX.  54:3 

Sept.  15,  1742.  Ch. :  I.  Ezekiel,  b.  Aug.  29,  1*743 ;  IT.  Reuben,  b.  Feb. 
19,  1746  ;  III.  Ailing,  b.  July  14,  1748,  d.  1749;  IV.  Ailing,  b.  May 
15,  1750,  d.  1750  ;  V.  Bethel,  b.  Aug.  9,  1751,  d.  1763;  VI.  Lucretia, 
b.  Jan.  20,  1754;  VII.  Rosetta,  b.  Feb.  10,  1757,  d.  1757;  VIII. 
Levina,  b.  April  20,  1759 ;  IX.  Shubel,  b.  July  29,  1761 ;  X.  Bethel,  b. 
July  18,  1767. 

19.  Reuben,  son  of  Thomas,  (18,)  m.  Rhoda  Hull  of  Wallingford. 
Ch. :  I.  Jolinson  F.  ;  II.  Eri ;  III.  Polly,  m.  Obadiah  Warner ;  IV.  Eze- 
kiel ;  V.  Lucretia,  m.  William  Pendleton  ;  VI.  Rosetta,  m.  David  Ed- 
wards; VII.  Phila,  m.  William  Smith  ;  VIII.  Lovisa. 

20.  Eri,  son  of  Reuben,  (19,)  m.  Alma  Baxter.  Ch. :  Orrin,  Julia 
Ann,  Lucius  B.,  Mary,  Ransom  W.,  Edward,  Charles,  Sarah,  Eri. 

21.  EzKKiEL,  son  of  Reuben,  (19.)  had,  Lovisa,  Alma,  Harriet,  Jennet, 
Merritt,  Miranda,  Sarah,  Mary  and  Hiram. 

22.  Mekritt,  son  of  Ezekiel,  (21,)  m.  Clarissa,  dau.  of  Elias  Prichard, 
and  had  Henrietta. 

23.  Ezekiel,  son  of  Thomas,  (18,)  m.  Mercy,  dau.  of  Ebenezer  Wel- 
ton,  Oct.  1765.  Ch.:  L  Eri,  b.  Feb.  8,  1768;  H.  Cephas,  b.  April 
25,  1771  ;  III.  Gracina,  b.  March  7,  1774. 

24.  Oliver,  son  of  Jolin,  (2.)  m.  Margaret,  dau.  of  Benjamin  Warner, 
Dec.  14,  1749,  and  d.  Nov.  10,  1809.  She  d.  Jan.  17,  1823.  Ch. :  L 
Anne,  b.  Dec.  14,  1749,  d.  1753  ;  H.  Ard,  b.  Aug.  19,  1752  ;  HI.  Ben- 
jamin, b.  Sept.  27, 1754;'  IV.  Arad,  b.  Feb.  26,  1758,  Avent  to  Virginia, 
m.  and  had  daughters;  V.  Margaret,  b.  Oct.  27,  1763. 

25.  Ard,  son  of  Oliver,  (24,)  m.  Sept.  13,  1773,  Elizabeth,  dau.  of 
Ebenezer  Warner,  and  d.  July  9.  1803.  She  d.  April  15,  1827.  Ch. : 
I.  Annis,  b.  Sept.  13,  1774,  m.  Lyman  Warner  of  Northfield,  and  d. 
July,  1844  ;  H.  Erastus,  b.  Aug.  6,  1776,  d.  Aug.  1849;  IIL  Margaret 
A.,  b.  Feb.  25,  1779,  m.  Lemuel  Porter,  went  to  Ohio,  and  d.  in  1806 ; 
IV.  Isaac,  b.  Oct.  2,  1785,  d.  Feb.  17,  1806,  while  a  member  of  Y.  C. 

26.  Erastus,  son  of  Ard,  (25,)  m.  Abigail  Church,  who  d.  Feb.  23, 
1846.  Ch. :  L  Polly,  b.  July  24,  1797,  ra^  Jared  S.  Hall,  July,  1834  ; 
H.  Shelden,  b.  Nov,  7,  1799;  IIL  Ard,  b.  Feb.  24,  1805,— resides  in 
Charleston,  S.  C;  IV.  Isaac,  b.  Aug.  25,  1806  ;  V.  Elizabeth,  b.  March 
27,  1809,  in.  Joseph  Hine,  July  20,  1836. 

27.  Shelden,  son  of  Erastus,  (26,)  m.  Betsey  Jordan,  Sept.  12,  1825, 
who  was  b.  Sept.  17,  1803.  Ch.:  Adaline  E.,  b.  Nov.  11,  1826  ;  Bird- 
sey  S.,  b.  Aug.  17,  1831  ;  Hiram  E.,  b.  Oct.  14,  1734. 

28.  Ard,  son  of  Erastus,  (26,)  m.  Caroline,  dau.  of  Richard  F.  Wel- 
ton,  who  d.  Oct.  1,1831,  aged  26.  Ch.:  L  Margaret  A.,  b.  Jan.  4, 
1827  ;  Ellen  E.,  b.  Oct.  18,  1829,  ra.  Horace  Johnson,  Sept.  7,  1852. 


544:  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURT. 

29.  Isaac,  son  of  Erastus,  (26,)  m.  Feb.  22,  1841,  Eunice  P.  Oviatt 
of  Ohio,  where  he  resides.  She  was  b.  Aug.  28,  1809.  Cb. :  Emily,  b. 
May  3,  1843  ;  Lucretia,  b.  May  16,  1845;  Luthera,  b.  May  16,  1845. 

30.  Benjamin,  son  of  Oliver,  (24,)  m.  Agnes,  dau.  of  Enos  Gunn. 
Ch. :  Anne,  b.  May  10,  1780  ;  Willard,  b.  Jan.  14,  1782  ;  Abel  G.,  b. 
Feb.  15,  1785;  Benjamin  S.,  b.  March  5,1791;  Arad  W.,  b.  May  1, 
1794. 

31.  Abel  G.,  son  of  Benjamin,  (30,)  ra.  Anna,  dau.  of  John  Warner. 
Ch. :  I.  George,  was  drowned  when  a  young  man  ;  II.  Jane,  m.  Luther 
Hoadley  ;  III.  Abijah,  m.  Elizabeth  Upson,  has  a  dau. ;  IV.  William,  m. 
Elvira  Atkin?,  ch.,  Jane  and  Harriet ;  V.  John  ;  VI.  Henry,  m.  Mrs. 
White — one  child. 

32.  Benjamin  S.,  son  of  Benjamin,  (30,)  ra. Gray.     Ch.:  Peter, 

deceased  ;  Caroline,  m. Chidsey  ;  Grey,  d.  young. 

33.  Arad  W.,  son  of  Benjamin,  (30,)  m.  Sally  Smith.  Ch. :  I.  Ellen, 
b.  April  17,  1817,  m.  Chas.  Wooster,  d.  July  16,  1843;  II.  Oliver,  b. 
Aug.  24,  1820,  d.  Jan.  26,  1842;  III.  Andrew  A.,  b.  Aug.  27,  1823,  d. 
Dec.  3,  1841.  The  two  last  d.  while  members  of  Trinity  Coll.  IV. 
Noah  B.,  b.  March  21,  1829,  m.  Eliza  Baldwin  of  New  Haven  ;  ch.,  Oli- 
ver, b.  July  8,  1853. 

Second  Family,  or  Richard's  Posterity. 

34.  Richard,  son  of  John,  (1.)  had,  I.  Richard,  b.  1701  ;  II.  John,  b. 
July  13,  1703;  III.  Stephen,  b.  March   12,  1706;  IV.  Mary,  b.  June 

I,  1708 ;  V.  Thomas,  b.  Oct.  25,  1710,  d.  Dec.  1,  1780  ;  VI.  Keziah,  b. 
Dec.  1,  1713,  m.  Abraham  Warner;  VII.  EHakim,  b.  Jan.  21,  1715, 
d.  Nov.  20,  1794;  VIII.  Tabitha,  b.  Feb.  17,  1720,  m.  Edward  Neal— 

lived  in   Southington ;  IX.  Ede,  b.  April  24,  1729,  m. Lewis,  d. 

aged  21. 

35.  Richard,  son  of  Richard,  (34,)  m.  Anna  Fenton.      Ch. :  I.  John  ; 

II.  Anna ;  III.  Titus,  d.  unm.;  IV.  Abi,  m. Fenn  of  Watertown. 

36.  John,  son  of  Richard,  (35,)  m.  Dorcas,  dau.  of  Capt.  Samuel 
Hickox,  Jan.  5,  1758,  who  d.  June  13,  1815.  He  d.  Jan.  22,  1816. 
Ch.:  L  Abi,  b.  Nov.  2,  1758,  d.  1828,  unm.;  H.  Mary,  b.  June  10, 

1760,  m. Phelps,  d.  1811  ;  IIL  Anna,  b.  Feb.  11,  1762,  d.  1803, 

unm.;  IV.  Titus,  b.  July  3,  1764;  V.  Richard  F.,  b.  April  17,  1763, 
d.  May  9,  1829  ;  VL  John,  b.  Oct.  28,  1769 ;  VIL  Dorcas,  b.  Oct.  29, 
1771,  d.  1793  ;  VIIL  Adrian,  b.  Feb.  15,  1775,  d.  Oct.  20,  1804  ;  IX. 
John,  b.  Jan.  13,  1778,  d.  April  2,  1813. 

37.  Titus,  son  of  John,  (36,)  m.  Polly  Hickox.  Ch. :  I.  Julia  A.,  m. 
Selden  Shelton  of  Plymouth,  went  to  Western  N.  Y. ;  II.  Alanson  W. ; 


APPENDIX.  545 

III.  Ciirlos,  b.  1792,  d.  1799;  IV.  Dorcas,  rn.  Reuben  Hickox ;  V.  and 
VI.  Carlos  and  Titus,  I).  April  10,  18Ul,  boili  d.  young;  VII.  Sarah,  b. 
1803,  d.  1809  ;  VIIL  Wni.  Samuel,  b.  1806,  d.  1817  ;  IX.  Mary. 

38.  Richard  F.,  son  of  John,  (36.)  m.  1st,  Sarah  Annah  Ilickox,  2d, 
Anna,  dau.  of  Dr.  Timothy  Porter.     Ch.  :  I.  E|)hraim  W. ,   II.  Richard 

F.,  m. Loveland  ;  III.  Lydia  A.,  m.  Anson  Lane ;  IV.  George  \V. ; 

V.  Joseph  ;  VI.  Caroline,  b.  Nov.  6,  1805,  m.  Ard  Welton. 

39.  Adrian,  son  of  John,  (36  )  tn.  Sally  Clark.  Ch. :  I.  Mary  Ann,  ra, 
Reuben  Judd,  d.  Dec.  21,  1837,  aged  40  ;  II.  Sabrina,  b.  1799,  d.  1852; 

III.  Horace  Clark,  b.  1801,  d.  1854. 

40.  John,  son  of  John,  (36,)  m.  Abiab  Hull.  Ch. :  I.  Manvil ;  II. 
Leonard  ;  III.  Adrian  ;  IV.  Charles,  m.  Sally,  dau.  of  Thos.  Judd. 

41.  Rev.  Alanson,  son  of  Titus,  (37,)  m.  Eleanor  Tuttle,  d.  at  Detroit. 
Ch. :  Samuel,  Mary  and  John. 

42.  Ei^HKAiM  W,  son  of  Richard  F.,  (38.)  ra.  Polly,  dau.  of  Lemuel 
Nichols.  Ch. :  Sarah  Ann,  ra.  William  Hoadley ;  John;  George; 
Eithraim  ;  Henry  and  William. 

43.  George  W.,  son  of  Richard  F.,  (38,)  m.  Harriet  Minor,  who  d. 
May  26,  1839,  and  hem.  Mary  Ann  Graham.  Ch. :  Harriet  Minor, 
Mary,  Emily  J.,  Ellen  C.  and  George  Richard.  The  last  d.  Aug.  5, 
1855. 

44.  Joseph  C,  son  of  Richard  F.,  (38,)  ra.  Jane,  dau.  of  Timothy 
Porter.     Ch. :  Caroline. 

45.  Horace  C,  son  of  Adrian,  (39.)  m.  Sophia,  dau.  of  Daniel  Brad- 
ley. Ch. :  I.  William  A. ;  IL  Frederick  A.,  in.  and  has  a  son, 
Byron. 

46.  George,  son  of  Ephraim  W.,  (42,)  m.  Mary  Nichols,  who  d.  in 
1855.     Ch.:  Sarah,  Ellen  and   Charles. 

47.  William  A.,  son  of  Horace  C,  (45,)  m.  E!iza,  dau.  of  Leonard 
Pilchard.     Ch. :  Lewis  F.,  d.  1849  ;  Frederick  L.  and  William  P. 

48.  Stephen,  son  of  Richard,  (34 )  ra.  Dec.  13,  1731,  Deborah,  dau. 
of  John  Sutliff,  and  d.  April  30,  17.^9.  Ch. :  I.  Martha,  b.  Nov.  19, 
1732,  d.  1735;  IL  Levi,  b.  Nov.  10,  1734,  d.  1736;  UL  Martha,  b. 
March  1,  1736,  m.  J.  Grilley  ;  IV.  Dinah,  b.  May  2,  1738  ;  V.  Levi,  b. 
March  6,1741;  VL  Stephen,  b.  Jan.  7,  1744;  VH.  Thomas,  b.  Dec. 
22,  1749,  d.  1751 ;  VIII.  Thomas,  b.  Nov.  22,  1751. 

49.  Levi,  son  of  Stephen,  (48,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Richard  Seymour,- 
who  d.  in  1768,  and  he  ra.  2d,  Molly  Hull.  Ch. :  I.  Deborah,  b.  March 
28,  1762  ;  IL  Lydia,  b.  Oct.  28,  1763  ;  III.  Stephen,  b.  Oct.  1,  1765; 

IV.  Molly,  m.  Jesse  Silkrigg  of  Wolcott;  V.  Hannah,  ra.  Uezekiah 
Welton  ;  VL  Cynthia  Rosanna,  m.  Michael  Harrison  ;  VII.  Lavinia,  m. 

35 


54G  HISTORY    OF    WATEEBLEY. 

James  Brown ;  VIIT.  Disa  ;  IX.  BetPey,  ra. Camp;  X.   Philo,   m, 

Bhikesly,  removed  to  N.  Y.  State. 

50.  Stkphkn,  sot)  ofSte]lHTi,  (48,)  m.  Lucy  Tlmmas.  Cli. :  Lemuel, 
Levi,  Dinah,  Liun",  Zilpali,  Eiiliu,  Asher,  Alfred,  Betsey  and  liine. 

61.  Thomas,  son  of  Stephen,  (48,)  in.  Abigail,  dau.  of  Li.  iil.  Wm. 
Hickox,  June  L'2,  1772,  wlio  d.  Jan.  13,  1791.  He  m.  2d,  Paith  Tiiom- 
as,3d,  Ilannali,dau.  of  Lt.  Jaied  Hill,  and  d.  April,  18.35.  Cli. :  L  Sey- 
mour, b.  Jidy  2.  1772  ;  II.  Sarah,  b.  Dec.  18.  1773,  d.  1774  ;  HI.  Jared, 
b.  July  15,  1774;  IV.  Elias,  b.  Jidy  18,  !77(),m.  Rhoda  Prindle  of 
Watertowu  ;  V.  Sarah,  b.  Dec.  12.  1778,  m.  Levi  Hall  of  \Vol-;ott  ;  VL 
CIdoe,  b.  Nov.  2,  1780,  m.  John  Barnes  ;  VIL  Lydia,  b.  Jidy  21,  1783; 
VHL  Fanny,  b.  April  1,  1785;  IX.  Laura,  b.  Feb.  1787;  X.  Kansom, 
I).  July  18,  1789,  went  to  Canada;  XI.  Thomas  IL;  XH.  Faith  N.,  m. 
Street  Todd  ;  XHI.  Herschel,  b.  1797,  d.  1842. 

52.  Sevmouu,  son  of  Thomas,  (51,)  m.  Olive  Harrison.  Ch. :  Harri- 
son, Sophronia  and  John  P. 

63.  Jared,  son  of  Thomas,  (51.)  m.  Philoniela  Norton.  Ch.:  Abbe  ; 
Ziba;  En)ily  ;  Orestes;  Leonard;  Fanny  ;  Delia  A.,  m.  Daniel,  son  of 
Elias  Clark,  is  the  only  living  dau.  of  this  family  ;  Aimira;  Maiyett. 

64.  Hkrsciiki.,  son  of  Thomas,  (oL)  m.  Eunice  dau.  of  I.)avid  Prin- 
dle (^f  Watertuwn.  Ch.:  David  T. ;  Channcey  P.,  m.  Jennet  Cleve- 
land, and  h;id,  Dwight,  Caroline  and  Ella;  Sherman  E. ;  ILmnahA.; 
Ranslin  N. ;  Hector  E.;  Her>chel  O. 

65.  David  T.,  son  of  Herschel,  (54  )  m.  Isf,  Polly  Nichols,  2d,  Caro- 
line Turner.     Ch.  :  Everet  and  two  danghter.-i. 

56.  Sherman  E,  son  of  Her.schel,  (54.)  m.  Caroline  Cleveland,  who 
d.  June  15,  1856.     Ch.:  Hattie. 

57.  I-iANSLiN  N.,  son  of  Her.-chel,  (54,)  m.  Mary,  dau.  of  Edward 
Scott.     Ch.:  Mary  and  an(jther  dau. 

58.  Thomas,  son  of  Richard.  (34,)  m.  Lydia  Utter,  2d,  Lydia  Warner.  ■ 
He  lived  on  Bucks  hill — had  no  ch. — adopted  his  nephew,  Ridiard  Wel- 
ton.     His  wife  survived  him,  m.  Dr.  Preserved  Porter,  and  d.  Oct.   1821, 
aged  92. 

69.  Eliakim,  son  of  Richard,  (34  )  m.  April  28,  1736,  Eunice,  dau.  of 
Mos.'8  l^ronson.  Ch. :  L  Eliakim,  b.  Sept.  22,  1736,  d.  June  8,  1821  ; 
n.  Eunice,  b.  Got.  19,  1738,  m.  David  Roberts;  HL  Avis,  b.  Aug.  13, 
1740,  m.  Tiiaddeus  Barnes;  IV.  Richard,  b.  Oct.  10,  1743,  d.  Feb.  26, 
1822;  V.  Eli,  b.  Oct.  10,  1746;  VL  Moses,  b.  June  25,  1749;  VH. 
Aaron,  b.  Feb.  19,  1752;  VIIL  and  IX.  Henoni  and  Benjamin,  b.  Feb. 
18,  1756.    Benoni  d.  unm.,  Benjamin  d.  young. 

60.  Eliakim,  son  of  Eliakim,  (59,)  ni.  Amy,  dau.  of  Ebenezer  Bald- 


APPENDIX.  547 

win,  who  d.  Jan.  3,  1829,  ajred  87.  C'l.:  I.  Eben,  h.  June  24,  1764  ; 
n.  Eliakim,  b.  l)w.  1-3,  1763;  III.  Amy,  I).  Sept.  25,  1770,.!.  1770; 
IV.  Josej)!),  b.  S-pt.  6,  1771.  a.  1774;  V.  M  rk,  b.  April  27,  1773;  VI. 
Amy,  b.  April  4,  1776;  VII.  Avice,  b.  M  uvh  12,  1779,  d.  1779;  Vlll. 
Joseph,  b.  March  29,  1780;  IX.  Moses  b.  March  16,  1783,  d.  Sept.  14, 
1829  ;  X.  Micock,  b.  March  9,  1787,  d.  17.-8. 

61.  Richard,  son  of  Eiiakim,  (59  )  m.  M  irgaret,  dan.  of  El>enezer 
Warner,  April  27,  1766.  She  d.  Oci.  19.  1768.  and  he  ni.  2  1,  Han- 
nah Davis,  Aug.  7,  1770,  who  d.  D.-c.  11,  1839.  Ch. :  I.  Noah,  b. 
Feb.  15,  1767,  d.  Jan.  26,  1847  ;  II.  Richard  Warner,  b.  Oct.  10,  1768, 
d.  Dec.  1768;  III.  Richard,  b.  M  ly  10,  177  •,d.  Sept.  28,  1807;  IV, 
MarG:aret,  b.  July  2,  1772,  in.  D  miel   Steele;*   V.  Thomis,  b.  Dec.  8, 

1774,  d.  April  18,  1856;  VI.  Lydia,  b.  April  I,  1777,  ni.  Davi.l  Rob- 
erts of  Iknlington,  and  d.  Ang.  31,1.-28;  VII.  Hannali.  b.  (M.  10, 
1779,  m.  David  Warner — went  to  G-Mieseo.  N.  Y.;  VIII.  Joseph 
Davis,  b.  April  15,  1783,  d.  Jan.  16.  1825;  IX.  Bela,  b.  Sept.  9,  1787, 
d.Oct.   16,  1822. 

62.  Eli,  son  of  Eiiakim,  (59,)  m.  Anna  Baldwin.  July  1,  1771.  Ch. : 
Eli,  b.  Ang.    10,    1772;  Asa,   b.   Nov.    24.    1773;  Phebe,  b.   Sept.  29, 

1775,  d.  1777;  Eunice,  b.  Aug.  12,  1777;  l^enoni,  b.  April  19,  1780; 
Anna ;  Printha. 

63.  Eu,  son  of  Eli,  (62  )  had,  Joel,  P.ennet,  Eli  and  Asa. 

04.  Eli,  son  of  Eli,  (63.)  m.  Rlioda  Wilson.  Ch.  :  I.  Elmore,  m. 
Sarah  Ann  Clevelan.l ;  ch.,  I.  Homer  ;  II.  Jane  ;  III.  iiuth. 

65.  Asa,  son  of  Eli.  (62.)  m  Feim.    Ch. :   I.  Sel-l.-n  ;  II.  Hiram, 

m.  Harriet,  dau.  of  Timotliy  Hal',  d.  leaving  no  ch.;  HI.  Lyman;  IV. 
Emily,  m.  Simeon  Philips;  V.  IL'man. 

66.  Heman,  son  of  Asa,  (65,)  m.  1st,  Adaline  Blakeslee,  2d,  A. 
Carter.     Ch.  :  Oliver  Blakeslee  and  another  si.n. 

67.  Mo'^Es,  son  of  Eiiakim,  (59,)  m.  Betta  Woosier.  Ch. :  Andrew 
and  E'izur. 

68.  Akron,  son  of  Eiiakim,  (59,)  m.  Zera  Bronson,  Jan.  13,  1777. 
Ch.  :  Tamar,  b.  Feb.  28,  1778;  .lunia,  b.  Dec.  1779;  Harvey,  b.  Oct. 
28,  1780,  d.  1782;  Harvey,  b.  Nov.  2,  1782. 

69.  Ebev.  son  of  Eiiakim,  (60.)  m.  Si  a  ,  dau.  of  Tifus  Barnes,  and 
moved  to  Ohio  with  hia  faudly.  Ch.  :  Avice,  Sarah,  Selden,  Jacob, 
Elisha,  Caroline,  Eben  and  Polly. 


*  Rev.  AsHORL  Stkrlr,  a  son  of  Daniel  by  a  first  wife,  was  horn  in  Waterbury,  .Tan.  31.  179S. 
He  now  resides  in  Washington  City,  and  is  the  author  of  a  recent  work  evincing  Inborious  re- 
search, entitled  "  Chief  of  the  Pilgrims,  or  the  Life  and  Times  of  William  Brewstei ."  He  mar- 
ried a  descendant  of  Klder  Brewster. — U.  B. 


548  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUEY. 

.  70.  Eliakim,  son  of  Eliakim,  (60,)  m.  Loly,dau.  of  Titus  Barnes,  Jan. 
3,  1788,  and  went  to  Ohio  with  his  family.  Ch. :  I.  Orasena,  b.  March 
10,  1790,  m.  Thos.  Worden ;  11.  Micha  B.,  b.  Aug.  13,  1792,  m. 
Wealti)y  Upson  ;  III.  Sherman  P.,  b.  Oct.  24,  1796,  d.  1797;  IV. 
Sherman  P.,  b.  Oct.  8,  1798,  in.  Ruth  Upson;  V.  Sally  M.,  b.  July 
7,  1801,  m.  in  Ohio. 

71.. Mark,  son  of  Eliakim,  (00.)  m.  Sally  Davis,  and  removed  to  the 
State  of  N.  Y.  Ch. :  Samuel,  Truman,  Amy,  Iliram,  Harriet,  Almira 
and  Dorcas. 

72.  Joseph,  son  of  Eliakim,  (60,)  m.  Ellen,  dau,  of  John  Warner  of 
Plymouth,  and  went  to  the  State  of  N.  Y.  Ch. :  Norman,  Charlotte, 
Warner,  Emeline  and  Eliakim. 

73.  Moses,  son  of  Eliakim,  (60.)  m.  Iluldah,  dau.  of  Titus  Hotohkiss 
of  Wolcott,  Aug.  20,  1810.  Ch. :  I.  Milo,  b.  1811,  d.  young;  II. 
Julia,  b.  Nov.  22,  1813,  m.  Andrew  Hough  ;  III.  Sarah,  b.  Feb.  20, 
1820,  m.  Franklin  Hall;  IV.  Ilnl.lah,  b.  Sept.  12,  1823,  m.  Edward 
Pratt;  V.  Hester,  b.  April  6,  1825,  ra.  lliram  Curtiss  ;  VI.  Mary,  b. 
April  25,  1827,  m.  Joel  Hungerford. 

.  74.  Noah,  son  of  Richard.  (61.)  m.  Nabby  Chidsey  of  East  Haven, 
in  1791,  2iJ,  Ellen  Cowles  Dec.  1804,  who  d.  Nov.  26,  1848.  He  lived 
in  Harwinton.  Ch.  :  T.  Miles,  b.  June  15,  1793;  II.  Margaret  A.,  b. 
March  28,  1800,  d.  1803;  III.  Aaline,  b.  June  15,  1803,  m.  Willard 
Hitchcock  of  Burlington,  April  3,  1822,  and  went  to  .Vt. ;  IV.  Nabby, 
b,  Nov.  17,  1805,  m.  Charles  Judson,  May,  1826;  V.  Margaret  A.,  b. 
Jan.  2,  1808,  m.  Enoch  Marks,  May,  1826  ;  VI.  Noah  E.,  b.  Aug.  12, 
1811,  d.  Oct.  1848  ;  VII.  John  J.,  b.  Feb.  2,  1814  ;  VIII.  Lester  C,  b. 
April  20,  1S17;  IX.  Elvira,  b.  April  25,  1821,  m.  Rev.  Collis  Potter,' 
of  Plymouth,  in  1851;  X.  Bela  A.,  b.  Dec.  25,  1823;  XI.  Jane,  b. 
July  12,  1827,  m.  Jared  Smith  of  Harwinton  in  1854. 

75.  Miles,  son  of  Noah,  (74,)  m.  Jan.  1815,  Nancy,  dau.  of  Stephen 
Graves  of  E.  Plymouth.  Ch.:  I.  Street  C,  b.  Sept.  8,  1816  ;  II.  Xiinnus, 
b.  Dec.  16,  1817.  d.  Aug.  9,  1822  ;  HI.  Albert,  b.  May  7,  1820  ;  IV. 
Carlos,  b.  April  3,  1822 ;  V.  X.  Aianson,  b.  March  17,  1824  ;  VI.  Ruth 
Adaline,  b.  July  14,  1826,  m.  Eben  Coll  of  Plymouth,  April,  1845; 
VII.  Nancy  Ann,  b.  Jan.  25,  1830,  m.  Ral|»h  Humphrey  of  Ansonia, 
Nov.  1853  ;  VIII.  Major  G.,  b.  June  21,  1832  ;  IX.  Marvin  B.,  b.  June 
21,  1832  ;  X.  Emily  W,  b.  April  17,  1836. 

76.  NoahE.,  son  of  Noah,  (74,)  m.  Mahitabel  Bulkley  in  1832,  and 
2d,  Lydia  J.  Chidsey  in  1836.  Ch.:  Charlotte  A.,  Noah  J.,  Ellen  J. 
and  Seymour  H. 


APPENDIX.  549 

77.  John  J.,  son  of  Noah,  (74,)  m.  Maria  Wilcox,  April,  1840,  who 
d.  Sept.  1847.     Ch. :  Charles,  b.  1841 ;  Ellen  M.,  b.  1846. 

78.  Lester  C,  son  of  Noah,  (74,)  in.  Corra  Mathews  of  Bristol,  Sept. 
1845, — is  now  living  in  Henry  Co.,  111.  Ch. :  James  M.,  Ellen  A.  and 
Merritt  Ilobert. 

79.  Bela  A.,  son  of  Noah,  (74,)  resides  in  111.,  m.  Jane  Merritt,  has  a 
son. 

80.  Street  C,  son  of  Miles,  (75.)  m.  Aaline  Smith  of  Orange,  N.  J., 
Sept.  1841.     Ch.  :  John  S.  and  Alanson. 

81.  Albert,  son  of  Miles,  (75.)  m.  Susan  A.  Bidwell  of  Northfield, 
Jan.  1842.     Ch. :  Francis  G.,  Mary  E.  and  George  VV. 

82.  Carlos,  son  of  Miles,  (75,)  m.  Maria  E.  Peck  of  Farmington, 
Nov.  1846,  who  d.  Feb.  1850,  leaving  a  son,  Henry  A. 

83.  X.  Alanson,  son  of  Miles,  (75.)  is  an  Episcopal  clergyman,  and 
rector  of  St.  Matthew's  church,  Cambridge,  Henry  Co.,  111.  He  m.  Uar 
riet  F.  Root  of  Guilford,  Vt.,  Sept.  4,  1853,  and  had  a  dau.,  Ellen  E. 

84.  Richard,  son  of  Richard,  (61,)  m.  Sarah,  daughter  of  Nathaniel 
Gunn,  March,  1797.  She  d.  July  20,1851.  Ch. :  I.  Artemesia,  b. 
April  15,  1798,  m.  Lauren  Frisbie,  Nov.  28,  1821  ;  II.  Edward,  b.  Jan. 
19,  1800;  HL  Merritt,  b.  April  5,  1802;  IV.  Amy,  b.  April  18,  1804, 
m.  Mortimer  Jordon  of  Ala.;  V.  Hannah  M.,  b.  July  10,  1807,  m. 
Nathanial  Hawkins  of  Ala. 

85.  Edward,  son  of  Richard,  (84.)  m.  Laura  Brown.  Ch. :  Richard, 
Noah  A.,  Caroline  A.  and  Martha  A. 

86.  Merritt,  son  of  Richard,  (84,)  m.  went  South,  is  now  in  Califor- 
nia with  his  family.  Ch. :  Lamson,  Amy  and  Lydia  E, — probably 
others. 

87.  Thomas,  son  of  Richard,  (61,)  m.  Sybil  Cook  of  Wallingforo, 
Jan.  3,  1797.  She  was  b.  Oct.  10,  1778.  Ch. :  L  Lyman,  b.  June  15, 
1798;  H.  Evelina,  b.  Jan.  23,  1800,  ra.  Anson  Downs,  Oct.  26,  1823; 
HI.  Minerva,  b.  March  19,  1802,  ra.  Burton  Payne,  Feb.  3,  1828; 
IV.  Sally  D.,  b.  Sept.  5,  1807,  d.  1808  ;  V.  Sally  D..  b.  June  14,  1810, 
m.  Henry  Bronson,  Oct.  4,  1832;  VL  Nancy,  b.  April  12,  1812,  m. 
Frederic  A.  Bradley,  May  22,  1836. 

88.  Lyman,  son  of  Thos.  (87,)  m.  Minerva,  dau.  of  Benjamin  Judd, 
Dec.  24,  1822.  Ch. :  Henry  A.,  b.  Dec.  2,  1823  ;  Franklin  L.,  b.  Dec. 
11,  1827;  Nelson  J.,  b.  Feb.  15,  1829.  Henry  A.  is  m.  and  has  one 
ch.,  Thos.  H. — Franklin  L.  is  also  m.,  has  had  three  ch.,  one  only  is 
living. 

89.  Rev.  Joseph  D.,  son  of  Richard,  (61.)  m.  Eunice,  dau.  of  Victory 
Tomlinson.    Shed.  Feb.  20, 1832.    Ch.:  L  Julia  xM.,  b.  July,  1809,  m.  Geo. 


550  HISTORY    OF    WATERBUKT. 

Wainor  ;  TI.  Ilobert  V.,  b.  Oc-t.  28, 181 1,  m.  Adaline,  daw.  of  Lutlier  Rirh- 
ards  cd'Vl.,  and  liis  rli.  are,  Edwin  1),!..  183(1,  Sarah  ("".,  b.  1839,  Harriet 
A.,  b.  1850  ;  lII.Jope].b,  b.  May  in,  1814,  ni.  Mary,  dau.of  Seabury  Pier- 
pont.  Cb.,  Hebt-r  U.,  b.  1837,  Eiinite  C,  b.  1839,  Lucy  A.,  b.  1841  ; 
IV.  Henry,  I.  St-pl.  27,  1824,  tn.  Lucy  Haird  of  Bufialo,  N.  Y. 

90.  Bela,  son  of  Richard,  (61,)  m.  April  16,  1817,  Polly,  dau.  of 
Benjamin  Morehouse  of  Washington,  Conn.  She  was  b.  Nov.  27, 
1792.  Ch.:  L  Hi. hard,  b.  Jan.  7,  1820,  m.  Abby  Mitchel,  May  10, 
1853,  has  two  children,  Melly  M.  and  Kit  hard  ;  IL  Hawley  Seymour, 
b.  Oet.  13,  1821,  m.  Eliz:i  Merriam,  Dec.  19,1844.  Ch. :  Bela  and 
Richard. 

Third  Family,  or  George's  Posterity. 

91.  George,  son  of  John,  (1,)  had  oh.  :  L  Stephen,  b.  Oct.  27,  1713  ; 
n.  Samuel,  b.  Oct.  20,  1715,  d.  1738;  IIL  Peter,  b.  Sept.  28,  17I8; 
IV.  Elizabeth,  b.  May  23,  1721  ;  V.  Hannah,  b.  June  11,  1723;  VL 
James,  b.  Oct.  9,  1725  ;  VIL  Josiah,  b.  June  10,  1728,  m.  Martha,  dau. 
of  Jonathan  Kelly  of  Woodbury,  d.  in  1758,  no  ch. ;  VIII.  Dan,  b.  May 
19,  1731. 

92.  James,  son  of  George,  (91,)  was  the  first  male  child*  b.  (Oct.  9, 
1725)  in  that  part  of  Waierbury,  now  Waterlown.  He  m.  Mary,  wid. 
of  Joseph  Prichard  of  Milford,  in  1703. 

93.  SrEPHKN,  son  of  Geoige,  (91.)  m.  Aug.  27,  1741,  Abigail,  dau. 
of  Jonathan  Welton.  She  d.  Nov.  1,  1776.  Ch. :  L  Elijah,  b.  Aug.  13, 
1742  ;  IL  Samuel,  b.  Nov.  2,  1744  ;  IIL  Jesse,  b.  Nov.  23.  1746  ;  IV. 
Amasa,  b.  April  26,  1749;  V.  Daniel,  b.  April  1,  1752,  d.  1753;  VL 
"Achsah,"  b.  Sept.  15,  1754  ;  VIL  Josiah,  b.  Feb.  17,  1759. 

94.  Elijah,  son  of  Stephen,  (93,)  m.  Feb  23,  1769,  Hannah,  dau.  of 
Isaac  T\ler  of  Wallingford.  Ch. :  Daniel  M.,  b.  Aug.  14,  1770  ;  Isaac, 
b.  Jan.  11,  1775  ;  Hannah,  b.  Jan.  3,  1778 ;  Stephen. 

95.  Sa ML' EL,  son  of  Stephen,  (93,)  m.  Jerusha  Hill,  Nov.  23,  1770, 
and  d.  May  9,  1777.  Ch. :  L  Anna,  b.  Dec.  23,  1770 ;  IL  Jonathan,  b. 
Feb.  14,1774;  ch.,  George,  Samuel,  Edward  and  Stephen  ;  IIL  Lydia, 
b.  Oct.  18,  1776. 

96.  Jesse,  son  of  Stephen,  (93,)   m.  Sarah,  dau.  of  Isaac  lyler  of 


*  The  first  permanent  settlers  of  Westbury,  so  far  as  my  inquiries  have  extended,  were  Jona. 
than  Scott,  Sen.  and  Dr.  (afterwards  De-iCon)  John  Warner.  These  had  no  children  after  their 
removal  thither.  Isaac  Castle  from  Woodbury  settled  there  about  17  5,  and  had  born  (and  re- 
corded ill  Waterbury)  a  son,  Asahel,  August  28,  172.%  (as  I  read  the  figures.)  Samuel  Thomasi 
another  settler,  had  a  daughter,  Mabel,  also  recorded  in  Waterbury,  b.  Aug.  14,  172j.  (See  p. 
253,  of  this  work.)— H.  B. 


APPENDIX.  551 

Wallingfoid,  Dec.   13,   1770.     Cli. :  Parthonia,  b.  July  4,  1772;  Abi- 
gail, b.  March  5,  1774  ;  Eiios,  b.  Sept.  29,  1776  ;  Jes<e. 

97.  Amasa,  soli  of  Stephen.  (93  )  in.  Mary,  dau.  of  Benjamin  Nichols, 
Sept.  G,  177U.  Ch.:  Achsah,  b.  May  20,  1773  ;  Orpha,  b.  Juc*^  ?, 
J77G. 

98.  JosiAH,  son  of  Stephen,  (93,)  had  ch.,  Samuel  and  Uri. 

99.  Peter,  son  of  George,  (91.)  in.  Abigail,  dau.  of  Nathaniel  Por- 
ter, Nov.  22,  1739.  Ch  :  I.  Samuel,  b.  S.'pt.  20,  1740,  d.  1740;  II. 
Ruth,  b.  Sept.  26,  1741  ;  III.  Peter,  b.  Feb.  28,  1744;  IV.  Job,  b. 
March  15,  1746,  d.  at  Ticonderoga,  (\t.  11,  1776;  V.  Abigail,  b.  Aug. 
4,  1748,  d.  1751  ;  VI.  George,  b.  Aug.  2(i,  1750,  d.  1751  ;  VII.  Abi- 
gail, b.  Oct.  27,  1752  ;  VIII.  Elizabeth,  b.  May  18,  1756  ;  IX.  Dinah,  b. 
June  1,  1759;  X.  George,  b.  Nov.  12,  1761;  XL  Mary,  b.  May  15, 
1765. 

100.  Peter,  son  of  Peter,  (99,)  in.  Desire  Cooper,  April  10,  1766. 
Ch.:  1.  De.Mie,  b.  Dec  15,  1766;  II.  A  son,  b.  July  1,  1769;  III.  Sa- 
rah, b.  May  19,  1771 ;  IV.  Peter,  b.  Dec.  1773  ;  V.  Josiah,  b.  Aug.  6, 
1776. 

101.  Dax,  son  of  George,  (91,)  m.  and  had  Gaal  and  James.  The 
last  had  a  dau.  Irena. 

WOODWARD. 

1.  Henry  Woodward,*  from  England,  settled  in  Dorchester,  Mass., 
about  1636,  and  united  with  tlie  church  there  previous  to  1639.  In 
1659,  he  removed  to  Northampton,  to  which  place  he  followed  Rev. 
Eleazer  Matlier,  ami  was  one  of  the  seven  |)iliars  when  the  church  was 
organized,  June  18,  1661.  He  built  a  mill  there,  (not  the  first  mill,) 
and  "  was  killed  in  his  gri>t  mill,"  (by  lightning  it  is  said,)  April  7» 
1685.  His  wife,  E  izabeth,  d.  in  Northampton,  Aug.  13.  1690.  Ch. : 
I.  Experience,  m.  Medad  Pomery,  Nov.  21,  1661;  II.  Freedom,  bap. 
at  Dorchester,  in  16  +  2,  m.  Jedediah  Strong,  Nov.  18,  1662;  III. 
Thankful,  m,  John  T.iyh.r,  Dec.  18,  1662  ;  IV.  John,  an  only  son. 

2.  Jonv,  son  of  Henry,  (1,)  lived  in  Northampton  till  after  the  death 
of  his  father.  He  removed  first  to  Westfield,  and  then  to  Lebanon, 
Conn.  He  m.  Anna  Dewey,  of  Westfield,  dau.  of  the  emigrant,  Thos. 
Dewey  of  Windsor,  May  18,  1671.     Ch.  recorded  in  Northampton  :  I. 


*  I  am  informed  that  he  hid  a  brother  John,  who  came  with  him  to  Mass., — became  a  Q^iaker, 
was  banishe  1,  went  to  R  I.,  w  is  a\,'iin  banished  and  his  estate  confiscated.  He  is  supposed  to 
have  gone  to  Virginia,  as  the  numerous  families  of  that  name,  now  found  at  the  South,  origina- 
ted in  that  State. 


552  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBCKY. 

Elizabeth,  b.  March  IV,  1672,  m.  Stephen  Lee  of  Westfield,  in  1691 ; 
11.  Jolin,  bap.  April  2,  1674;  111.  Samuel,  b.  March  20,  1676,  d.  Oct. 
20,  1676;  IV.  Henry,  b.  March  18,1680;  V.  Thomas,  b.  April  22, 
1682  ;  VI.  Lrael,  b.  Feb.  6,  1685. 

3.  Capt.  Israel,  son  of  John,  (2.)  m.  Abigail  Beard  of  Huntington, 
and  removed  to  that  part  of  Waterbury,  now  Watertown,  about  1750. 
They  lived  together  in  the  married  state  69  years,  and  d.  at  the  ad- 
vanced ages  of  93  and  96.  Ch.:  I.  Nathan;  II.  Abel,  b.  April  1, 
1736-7;  HI.  Israel;  IV.  John;  V.  Asa,  m.  Esther  Roberts,  noiss.; 
VI.  EMjah  ;  VII,  Anna,  m.  Asa  Curtiss ;  VIII.  Eunice,  m.  Wait  Scott ; 
IX.  Abigail,  d.  in  infancy  ;  X,  Samuel,  b.  Oct.  25,  1750. 

4.  Nathan,  son  of  Israel,  (3,)  m.  1st,  Sarah  Hickox,  2d,  Eunice 
Painter,  July  1,  1731,  Ch. :  Moses,  Hawkins,  Aatepas,  John,  Na- 
than, Sarah,  Lois,  Polly  and  Laura. 

5.  Abel,  son  of  Israel,  (3.)  m.  Lucy  Atwood,  March  20,  1765.  Ch.: 
I.  Rebun  S.,  b.  Jan.  9,  1766;  IL  Eunice,  b.  March  18,  1767;  IIL 
Lucy,  b.  March,  1769,  d.  1770;  IV.  Abel,  b. Oct.  13,  1770;  V.  James, 
b.  Sept.  25,  1772;  VL  David,  b.  Oct.  26,  1774;  VII.  Lucy,  b.  July 
23,  1776;  VIIL  John,  b.  Aug.  12,  1778;  IX.  Jerusha,  b.  April  2, 
1781;  X.  Kussel,  b.  1783. 

6.  Israel,  son  of  Israel,  (3,)  m.  Abigail,  dau.  of  Eliakim  Stoddard, 
Oct.  28,  1765.  Ch.:  Israel  B.,  b.  1767  ;  Pamelia,  b.  1770;  Abigail,  b. 
1772  ;  Anna,  b.  1774  ;  Asa,  b.  1779. 

7.  John,  son  of  Israel,  (3,)  m.  Lydia  Trowbridge,  July  13, 1786.  Ch.: 
William,  b.  May  3,  1787;  Rebecca,  b.  July  9,  1789  ;  Abigail,  b.  June 
30,  1791 ;  Lucius. 

8.  Elijah,  son  of  Israel,  (3,)  m.  Margary  Richards.  Ch. :  Truman,' 
Sally,  Minerva  and  Dotha. 

9.  Dr.  Samuel,  son  of  Israel,  (3,)  ra.  Mary  Griswold.  Ch. :  Mary,  Laura, 
Samuel  Bayard,  Elijah,  Griswold,  Rufus,  Iletiry  and  Charles.  Samuel 
B.  was  a  distinguished  physician,  first  of  VVethersfield  then  of  Worces- 
ter, and  afterwards  of  Northampton,  Mass.,  where  he  died  in  1850.  He 
had  charge  of  the  Hospital  for  the  Insane  in  Worcester.  Rufiis  gradu- 
ated at  Y.  C.  in  1816,  became  a  tutor  and  d.  in  1824.  Henry  was  a 
physician  in  Middletown  of  great  promise,  and  died  in  1832.  Charles 
is  now  a  well  known  practitioner  of  medicine  in  Middletown.  They 
were  all  born  in  Torringford,  to  which  place  the  father  removed  in  early 
life. 


III.   LATER   ECCLESIASTICAL  SOCIETIES: 
MANUEACTURING:  STATISTICS. 


After  the  matter  of  the  preceding  pages  had  been  arranged,  and  the  book 
far  advanced  in  the  printing,  there  were  put  into  my  hands  certain  documents 
relating  to  the  more  recently  organized  churches  of  Waterbury,  and  the  manufac- 
turing interests  of  the  place.  1  insert  them  here,  in  some  instances  giving  only 
summaries.  The  slietch  of  the  Baptist  church  which  immediately  follows  has  been 
already  printed. 

THE    BAPTIST    CHUKCH   IX   WATERBURY. 

In  preparing  a  sketch  of  the  History  of  the  Baptist  Church  in  Waterbury, 
great  difficulty  has  been  experienced  from  the  imperfection  of  its  records  during 
the  earlier  years  of  its  existence.  Indeed  the  history  of  the  church,  as  here 
presented,  from  the  time  of  its  organization  to  the  year  1836,  a  period  of  33 
years,  has  been  mainly  taken  from  Association  minutes,  the  records  of  neighbor- 
ing churches,  and  the  personal  recollections  of  those  who  still  survive. 

In  the  year  1791,  November  7th,  a  number  of  the  members  of  the  ancient 
church  of  WaTlingford,  (now  Meriden,)  were  organized  into  a  distinct  body, 
known  for  a  time  as  the  Second  Baptist  church  in  Wallingford.  Among  this 
number  were  Zenas  Brockett,  David  Frost  and  Isaac  Terrell,  the  first  Baptists  in 
the  town  of  Waterbury.*  For  several  years  it  was  their  custom,  and  the  custom  of 
those  afterwards  associated  with  them,  to  visit  the  church  of  their  adoption  at 
least  once  every  month,  and  this  journey,  a  distance  of  twelve  miles,  they  usually 
performed  on  foot.  By  these  brethren,  meetings  were  established  and  conducted 
in  the  town  of  Waterbury,  and  in  1803^  Xovember  10th,  a  church  was  organized 
of  those  previously  connected  with  the  Second  Baptist  church  in  Wallingford. 
Preeminent  in  this  movement  were  the  brethren  whose  names  are  above 
recorded  ;  men  who  deserve  a  cherished  and  honored  memory  as  leaders  of  the 
infant  church,  and  as  Christians  of  tried  integrity  of  character  and  purity  of  life. 
Poor  in  the  riches  of  this  world,  but  rich  in  those  graces  that  find  favor  with 
God,  this  little  band  maintained  for  twelve  years,  with  most  unwavering  fidelity, 
their  regular  meetings  without  a  settled  pastor.  And  their  humble  labors  were 
bleSsedT^a  a  gradual  but  uninterrupted  growth.  During  this  period  they  were 
favored  from  time  to  time  with  the  administration  of  the  ordinances  by  elders 
Samuel  Miller  and  Daniel  Wildman,  and  occasionally  by  elders  Dethick  and 
Fuller. 

*  There  were  Baptists  in  Waterbury  l«t  Society  who  bore  lists,  as  early  as  I76T,  as  appears  by 
papers  of  that  date  relating  to  Farmingbury's  petition  to  the  Assembly  for  society  privileges. 
— H.  B, 


654 


HISTOKY    OF   WATEEBCRY. 


In  the  autumn  of  1815,  brethren  Samuel  Potter  and  Jesse  Frost  were  ordained 
co-pastors  of  the  church.  Durirg  this  joiLt  pastorate  the  church  erjoyed  an  un- 
usual degree  of  peace  and  harmony,  and  many  a  season  occurred  which  made  the 
place  of  worship  verily  the  house  of  God  and  gate  of  heaven. 

In  1817,  Xov.  loth,  the  church,  which  had  attained  a  membership  of  nearly  one 
hundred,  was  divided  by  the  formation  of  the  Woodbridge  and  Salem  church.  For 
this  purpose  60  members  were  dismissed,  embracing  those  residing  in  the  southern 
part  of  Waterbury,  (now  Naugatuck,)  and  the  adjoining  towns  of  Woodbridge 
(Bethany)  and  Hamden,  leaving  but  about  thirty  with  the  original  church,  and 
these  in  temporal  prosperity  by  no  means  the  most  favored.  Elder  Samuel  Potter 
took  charge  of  the  new  church,  while  Elder  Jesse  Frost  remained  with  the  old.* 

Soon  after  the  constitution  of  the  Woodbridge  and  Salem  church,  the  church  in 
Waterbury  erected  a  house  of  worship  in  the  northeastern  section  of  the  town, 
which  they  continued  to  occupy  until  the  completion  of  their  present  house  in 
1835. 

In  the  year  1827,  Elder  Jesse  Frost,  their  pastor,  was  removed  by  death.  The 
duty  of  leading  the  church  then  devolved  upon  Dca.  Timothy  Porti r,  who  had 
been  called  by  them  to  accept  licensure  about  a  year  previous,  and  who,  from  this 
time  till  1835,  a  period  of  about  eight  years,  gratuitously  ministered  unto  them  and 
performed  the  various  duties  of  the  pastorate. 

During  this  period,  the  prosperity  of  the  church  was  constant  and  marked. 
Each  year  witnessed  accessions  to  the  number  of  converts  by  baptism.  In  1828, 
a  special  refreshing  was  enjoyed,  when  twenty-three  were  baptized  ;  and  another 
in  1831,  when  thirteen  were  in  like  manner  added  to  the  church.  So  marked  at 
this  time  was  their  spiritual  prosperity,  as  evinced  by  union  and  fellowship,  as  well 
as  in  their  assemblies  where  they  were  wont  to  meet,  that  many  of  the  old  disciples 
still  look  back  with  earnest  longing  for  a  return  of  the  former  days.  The  ordinances 
were  administered  during  this  period  by  Elder  I.  Atkins  and  Elder  Samuel 
Miller,  and  after  his  death  by  Elder  William  Bentley. 

The  church  now  began  to  suffer  much  from  the  inconveniences  and  inadequacy  of 
their  house  of  worship.  TtiiSjaUidHgh  located  two  and  a  half  miles  from  the  centre 
of  population,  with  benches  only  for  seats,  and  no  means  of  warming  in  winter,  had 
yet  become  too  straitened  for  their  numbers,  so  that  their  meetings  were  not  un- 
frequently  held  in  the  neighboring  groves.  Finally,  after  anxious  and  mature  de- 
liberation, they  decided  to  erect  a  new  house  of  worship  in  the  center  of  the  town. 
This  was  known  to  be  a  great  undertaking,  but  they  felt  that  the  interests  of  the 
cause  demanded  the  effort,  and  they  determined  cheerfully  to  incur  the  burden. 
They  entered  into  a  written  compact  to  subject  themselves  to  a  voluntary  assess- 

*  The  Woodbridge  and  Salem  church,  now  extinct,  seems  to  deserve  in  this  connection  a 
passing  notice.  After  the  separation,  for  six  years  it  enjoyed  a  continual  manifestation  of  the 
Divine  Presence,  so  that  from  sixty  it  increased  to  one  hundred  and  fifteen  members.  In  1826,  ita 
number  was  reduced  to  eighty-eight.  In  IS2S-9,  God's  presence  was  again  manifest,  and  forty- 
five  were  added  -by  baptism,  making  about  one  hundred  and  thirty  actual  members.  Prom 
this  period  the  number  gradually  declined,  till  in  1843  the  church  ceased  to  be  recognized  as  a 
member  of  the  Association.  Their  pastor,  ^:lder  Samuel  Potter,  was  removed  by  death  in  IS33, 
Dec.  2.  They  were  then  for  a  time  led  by  Elder  David  Bradley,  and  finally,  after  an  ititt-ival 
of  some  years,  by  KIder  Jacob  Sloper,  their  last  pastor.  Some  of  the  members  afterwards 
united  with  the  church  in  Waterbury,  and  some  still  remain  scattered  over  the  mountains  and 
through  the  valleys. 


APPENDIX.  000 

ment,  the  basis  of  which  should  be  the  grand  list  of  the  town,  apportioned  by  a 
committee  appointed  from  their  own  number.  In  case  any  member  should  feel 
aggrieved,  1  e  might  appeal  to  another  committee  taken  from  the  church,  and 
finally  to  one  selected  from  a  neighboring  church.  Upon  this  basis,  tin  y  went 
forward  and  erected  their  present  house  of  worship,  at  a  cost  of  about  ^O.uUO, 
completing  it  in  the  year  1835.  Rev.  Russell  Jennings  was  then  chosen  their 
pastor,  whose  acceptable  labors  were  bTes.sed  in  a  largely  iuereased  congregation, 
and  by  two  special  outpourings  of  the  Spirit  in  the  years  18S6  and  1838,  in  which 
forty  were  baptized.  He  resigned  in  1838,  and  the  church  was  supplied  during 
the  year  following  by  Rev.  E.  Savage  and  Rev.  \V.  Russell. 

In  1839,  Rev. ^P.Watrous  succeeded  lo  the  pastorate,  during  whose  minis- 
tration eighty-one  were  baptized.  He  was  succeeded  by  Rev.  W.  S.  Smith  in 
1840,  who  remained  only  a  few  months.  From  1840  to  1844,  the  church  was 
witkout^a-pastor.  The  congregation,  however,  was  regularly  supplied  with  the 
preaching  of  the  Word  by  Rev.  G.  Allen  and  Rev.  I.  Atkins.  It  was  during  this 
period  that  occurred  those  dark  days  of  their  hislory  which  so  severely  tried  their 
hearts  and  faith.  A  large  debt  had  remained  upon  their  house  at  the  time  of  its  com- 
pletion. Still  the  debt  was  not  unexpected.  But  soon  after  the  church  was  finished, 
occurred  the  great  financial  crisis  of  1837,  fiom  whose  disastrous  influence  no 
section  of  the  country  was  exempt,  and  whose  shock  was  especially  felt  by  the 
brethren  of  Waterbury  who  had  struck  hands  for  building  the  house  of  God.  Still 
they  struggled  on  as  best  they  could  under  the  heavy  burden,  until  the  yeas  1843 
and  '44.  And  it  was  only  when  they  had  voluntarily  submitted  to  three  assess- 
ments, each  of  170  cents  upon  the  dollar  of  the  grand  list  of  the  town,  (so  that  the 
assessments  had  amounted  to  more  ban  $'i5o  upon  every  SluCO  listed,  and  over  $100 
for  every  person  whose  head  alon-e  stood  in  the  list ;)  it  was  only  when  they  had  seen 
trusted  ones  prove  f;ilse  and  the  faithful  well  nigh  crushed,  their  house  of  worship 
attached  by  fraudulent  claims,  and  closed  for  an  entire  year  except  from  sun  to 
sun  on  the  Sabbath,  to  save  it  from  passing  legally  from  their  hands ;  it  was 
only  when  they  had  been  driven  to  the  Legislature  ior  a  "  Confirming  Act,"  and 
to  the  Courts  of  Chancery  for  the  vindication  of  their  rights ;  it  w  as  only  after  a 
series  of  struggles  and  sacrifices  of  this  character,  by  which  their  resources  had 
become  exhausted  and  their  strength  and  numbers  wasted,  that  they  resolved  to 
appeal  to  neighboring  churches  ior  assistance,  as  their  only  remaining  hope. 
That  assistance  was  cheerfully  and  liberally  granted.  About  $700  were  thus 
receivBd,  by  which,  in  addition  to  a  fourth  subscription  in  the  church,  nearly 
equal  to  each  of  the  preceding  three,  they  became  in  1847  entirely  free  from 
pecuniary  embarrassment. 

In  1844,  Rev.  A.  Darrow  was  called  to  the  pastorate,  who  continued  to  fulfill 
its  duties  till  1847.  In  1845  the  church  was  revived,  and  nineteen  added  by  bap- 
tism through  his  labors.  In  October,  1847,  Rev.  N.  M.  Perkins  became  pastor  of 
the  church,  and  continued  to  labor  with  great  acceptance  for  six  years.  During 
his  labors,  the  means  and  influence  of  the  church  were  greatly  extended,  and 
forty-one  w^ere  added  to  it  by  baptism.  He  resigned  in  April,  1855,  and  was  suc- 
ceeded by  Rev.  Joseph  A.  Bailey,  with  whose  labors  the  church  is  still  favored. 
In  him  the  church  is  now  most  happily  united,  and  through  him  has  been  greatly 
prospered,  both  in  a  large  increase  to  the  congregation  and  the  addition  by  bap- 
tism of  forty-seven  to  the  number  of  its  members.  The  present  number  of 
members  is  two  hundred  and  thirty-one. 


556  HISTORY    OF   WATERBUET. 


THE  METHODIST  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH  IN  WATERBURY. 

Of  the  early  history  of  Methodism  in  Waterbury,  but  little  is  now  known.  It 
is  remembered,  however,  by  some  now  living,  that  as  early  as  the  year  1796  there 
were  a  few  of  this  then  despised  persuasion  residing  in  different  parts  of  the 
town,  mostly  near  what  is  now  its  easterly  boundary.  Bishop  Asbury,  in  his 
Journal,  under  date  of  Sept.  23d,  1*796,  mentions  passing  on  his  way  from  East 
Hartford  to  Stratford,  through  Waterbury,  Salem  and  Oxford,  and  of  preaching 
at  Waterbury  in  the  "  Separate  meeting  house."  The  location  of  this  meeting 
house  the  writer  has  not  been  able  to  ascertain. 

Again,  the  Bishop,  recording  his  attendance  at  a  quarterly  meeting  at  Litch- 
field, Sunday,  Aug.  3d,  1800,  says  :  "  On  Sunday  morning  we  had  a  living  love  feast. 
Some  from  Waterbury  were  fervent  in  spirit,  serving  the  Lord."  The  names  of 
these  fervent  Christians  so  worthy  of  special  notice  are  not  handed  down  to  us.  A 
"  class "  was  formed  of  those  residing  in  the  east  part  of  the  town,  but  such  of 
its  members  as  were  not  scattered  by  removal  or  death  afterward  united  with  a 
little  society  organized  in  Prospect. 

The  present  Society  was  organized  in  the  summer  of  1815,  at  the  house  of 
James  Wheeler,  about  half  a  mile  above  Waterville,  by  the  Rev.  Samuel  Cochran, 
then  preacher  in  charge  of  the  Litchfield  Circuit.  It  consisted  of  only  five  per- 
sons, viz :  James  Wlieeler  and  wife,  Samuel  R.  Hickox  and  wife,  and  Azuba  Tut- 
tle.  The  little  band  held  their  meetings  during  the  first  year  at  the  same  house, 
.  having  preaching  once  in  two  weeks  on  Tuesday  evenings.  Reverends  Billy 
Hibbard  and  Smith  Dayton  were  colleagues  with  Rev.  Samuel  Cochran  at  that 
time,  and  Rev.  Nathan  Bangs  was  presiding  elder  of  the  Rhinebeck  District,  to 
which  Litchfield  Circuit  then  belonged.  They  ftftervvard  held  meetings  at  the 
house  of  David  Wheeler,  a  little  east  of  Waterville  "at  "  Pine  Hole,"  and  in  the 
east  center  school  house  which  stood  near  what  is  now  the  northerly  point  of 
Union  Square.  Being  "  voted  out"  of  the  school  house,  their  ark  found  for  sev- 
eral years  a  welcome  resting  place  in  the  dwelling  of  Widow  Mary  Peck,  a 
"  mother  in  Israel,"  whose  memory  will  long  be  gratefully  cherished  in  the  church 
she  loved.  Her  dwelHng  was  the  low  red  house  still  standing  on  East  Main  street, 
near  the  Pin  Factory. 

Meetings  were  also  held  occasionally  at  the  residences  of  Widow  David  Wheeler 
at  Pine  Hole,  Mr.  Timothy  Ball  at  Bucks  Hill,  &c.  Still  later  a  room  was  obtain- 
ed for  a  time  in  the  Franklin  House,  and  for  a  year  or  two  preceding  the  erection 
of  their  first  house  of  worship,  meetings  were  held  in  the  academy,  and  oc- 
casionally in  the  old  school  house,  the  doors  of  which  were  again  opened.  During 
the  whole  of  this  period  there  was  no  Sabbath  preaching,  except  occasionally, 
when  a  local  preacher  could  be  obtained.  The  circuit  preachers  came  around 
once  in  two  weeks  preaching  on  week  day  evenings. 

Thus  for  sixteen  years  the  little  society  struggled  on,  unpopular  with  men,  but 
enjoying  the  favor  of  God;  poor  in  this  world's  goods,  but  rich  in  faith;  at  no 
time  numbering  more  than  twenty  or  thirty  members,  and  without  a  convenient 
place  of  worship ;  yet  claiming  the  promise  of  our  Lord,  (and  often  realizing  its 
fulfillment,)  that  "  Where  two  or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name,  there 
am  I  in  the  midst  of  them." 

But  the  summer  and  fall  of  the  year  1831  will  long  be  remembered  by  this 


APPENDIX. 


557 


and  other  churches  of  Waterbury  as  a  season  of  gracious  revival.  Among  the 
Metlibdists  the  work  commenced  under  the  preaching  of  Rev.  Heman  Bangs,  then 
preacher  in  charge  of  Derby  Circuit,  (to  which  Waterbury  belonged  from  1829  to 
1832,)  and  continued  with  great  power  under  his  ministry  and  that  of  his  colleague, 
Rev.  Daniel  Smith,  they  visiting  Waterbury  often  during  the  revival.  Many  were 
added  unto  the  Lord,  and  the  society  was  increased  from  less  than  thirty  in  ftum- 
ber  to  about  one  hundred.  Such  an  accession  rendered  a  more  commodious 
place  of  worship  necessary,  and  in  January,  1832,  it  was  decided  to  build  a  meet- 
ing house  fifty-l«et  long  and  thirty-six  feet  wide.  This  building  still  stands  on  the 
corner_of_yniori_square  and  Scovill  street.  It  was  completed  at  a  cost  of  about 
$2,7<iO,  and  was  dedicated  April  2'7th,  1833,  Dr.  Wilbur  Fiske  preaching  the  dedi- 
cation sermon.  From  this  date  the  church  was  favored  with  regularly  stationed 
preachers,  and  though  burdened  with  a  heavy  debt  and  increased  expenses,  and 
often  weakened  by  the  removal  of  its  members,  continued,  under  the  blessing  of 
God,  to  increase  in  numbers  and  prosperity.  Its  membership  had  increased  in 
1840  to  1-45,  in  1845  to  185,  and  in  1852  to  245. 

During  the  year  last  mentioned,  finding  enlarged  accommodations  again  neces- 
sary, it  was  resolved  to  erect  the  present  tasteful  and  commodious  edifice.  It  is 
eligibly  located  on  East  Main  street,  a  few  rods  from  Center  square.  It  is  75  feet 
deep  by  55  feet  in  width,  is  built  of  brick,  and  cost  with  the  lot  on  which 
it  stands  about  $iO,Oi)0.  It  was  dedicated  March  1st,  1854.  Much  credit  is  due 
Rev.  N.  Mead,  preacher  in  charge  at  the  time  the  building  was  commenced,  for 
the  good  judgment  and  taste  with  which  it  was  located  and  planned,  and  for  the 
financial  ability  displayed  in  securing  the  funds  for  its  erection. 

The  chnrch  now  numbers  about  2(50  members,  has  a  well  organized  Sunday 
scbqol,  comprising  35  officer^  and  teachers  and  over  200  scholars,  and  although 
still  unburdened  with  wealth  has  reason  to  anticipate  an  increasingly  prosperous 
future.  It  is  under  the  pastoral  care  of  Rev.  J.  H.  Perry,  D.  D.,  one  of  the  ablest 
ministers  of  the  New  York  East  Conference. 


Names  of  Preachers  since  1{ 


1833,  Rev.  Davis  Stocking, 

1834,  "  W.  S.  Smith, 

1835,  "  Sanford  Washburn, 

1836,  "  H.  D.  Gossling, 

1837,  "  Wm.  McKendree  Bangs, 

1838,  "  Lorin  Clark, 
1839-40,  "  Chas.  Chittenden, 
1841-42,  "  Wm.  C.  Hoyt, 

1843,  "  Aaron  S.  Hill, 

1844,  "  Wm.  Gay, 

1845,  "  Moses  Blydenburgh, 

1846,  "  Ebenezer  0.  Beers  and 
"  Elias  Gilbert,     circuit 


preachers,  (once  a  month,)  and  Rev. 
Joseph  Smith  and  Rev.  Larmon  W. 
Abbott,  local  preachers,  (the  balance 
of  the  time.) 

1847,  Same  as  1846,  excepting  Rev.  F. 
W.  Sizer,  in  place  of  Rev.  E.  0. 
Beers, 

1848,  Rev.  Seneca  Rowland, 
1849-50,  "     Ira  Abbott, 
1851-2,     "     Nathaniel  Mead, 
1853-54,  "     Benj.  Pilsbury, 
1855-6,     "     Thomas  G.  Osborn, 
1857,         "     James  H.  Perry,  D.  D. 


558  HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUEY. 


CATHOLIC  CHURCH  OF  WATERBURY. 

Previous  to  1835,  there  were  but  few  Catholics  in  Waterbury,  who  wore  visited 
occasionally  from  New  Haven  by  Rev.  James  McDermod,  Catholic  pastor  in  that 
city.  In  1837,  Rev.  James  Smith,  aLso  of  New  Haven,  succeeded  Father  McDer- 
mol  in  ths  visit ition  of  the  district.  The  latter  coiitinued  to  superintend  the 
affairs  of  the  Catholics  till  the  year  1846,  when  he  was  replaced  by  Rev.  Charles 
O'Reilly,  who,  however,  remained  but  three  months.  As  yet  there  had  been  no 
Catholic  clergyman  permanently  located  in  Waterbury.  The  congregation  was 
too  small  to  support  a  regtdar  p;vstor,  but  having  increased  in  1847  to  about  one 
hundred,  the  Rev.  Michael  O'Neill  was  permanently  settled  there  by  Dr.  Tyler,  the 
bishop  of  the  diocese. 

The  services  of  the  Catholic  church  were  celebrated  for  the  first  time  in_Water- 
bury  in  a  small  house  in  the  east  part  of  the  city,  owned  and  occupied  by,,Mr. 
Michael  Nevil,  who  was  the  first  Catholic  who  settled  in  the  city.  This  was  in 
1835.  In  this  small  house,  service  was  held  for  eight  years,  when  it  being  neces- 
sary to  obtain  a  larger  apartment,  the  school-house  in  the  Gaylord  Plain  district 
was  kindly  and  gratuitously  offered  by  the  then  committee.  Here  the  Catholics 
continued  to  worship  for  more  than  a  year,  when,  becoming  too  numerous  to  be 
accommodated  there,  they  rented  "Washington  Hall"  for  the  purpose  of  divine 
service.  In  1847,  they  purchased  the  old  Episcopal  church.  From  this  date  to 
the  present  time,  they  have  continued  to  increase  in  numbers,  being  at  present  a 
congregation  of  nearly  four  thousand,  including  children. 

A  beautiful  church  is  now  in  course  of  erection  for  the  use  of  the  Catholics. 
The  style  is  the  early  Christian  Gothic  architecture  of  the  twelfth  century.  It  is 
of  brick,  and  will  be  richly  ornamented  in  the  interior.  The  probable  cost  is 
$30,000. 

The  present  and  second  pastor  of  Waterbury  is  the  Rev.  T.  F.  Hendricken.  It 
is  strange  that  all  those  who  visited  Waterbury  for  missionary  purposes  are  still 
living. 

The  rapid  increase  of  the  Catholics  of  Waterbury  is  attributed  by  the  Catholics 
themselves,  as  much  to  the  known  kindness  and  urbanity  of  the  native  citizens 
towards  the  stranger,  as  to  the  extensive  manufacturing  establishments  which 
require  their  labor. 

THE  SECOND  CONGREGATIONAL  CHURCH. 

It  was  organized  in  April,  1852,  with  fifty  members.  Its  organization  at  that 
time  resulted  from  the  conviction,  which  for  two  years  had  been  entertained  by 
the  members  of  the  First  Congregational  church,  that  the  rapidly  increasing  pop- 
ulation of  the  place  demanded  for  that  portion  of  it  which  might  be  of  Congrega- 
tional sentiments  more  extensive  accommodations  for  public  worship  than  were 
afforded  by  the  house  of  worship  of  the  First  society. 

In  Apr-il,  1855,  a  new  and  commodious  house  of  worship,  built  by  the  Second 
society,  was  consecrated  to  the  name  and  service  of  God.  Said  house  afl'ords 
sittings  for  one  thousand  persons. 

The  number  of  names  enrolled  on  the  catalogue  of  the  church  in  April,  1857, 
was  one  hundred  and  seventy,  to  seven  of  which  had  been  appended  the  sad 


&o^-'^ 


APPENDIX.  559 

mark  which  indicates  decease,  and  to  twenty-six  that  which  indicates  reiroval  to 
other  cluirches.  The  Rev.  S.  W.  Magill  was  installed  pastor  of  the  church  in 
May,  185'2,  and  still  occupies  the  pastoral  office. 


MANUFACTURING  IN  WATERBURY. 

The  manufacturing  business  of  Waterbury  was,  it  may  perhaps  be  said,  com- 
menced by  Lieut.  Ard  Welton.  He  made  guns,  using  hand  power,  alone,  on 
Bucks  Hill,  during  the  Revolutionary  war  or  soon  after,  and  furnished  some,  it  is 
Btated,  for  the  government.  A  few  brass  muskets  were  manufactured  by  him,  but 
perhaps  only  as  curiosities.  At  length,  he  removed  his  works  to  the  place  on 
Mad  River,  recently  occupied  by  Sherman  Bronson. 

About  179i»,  James  Harrison,  a  brother  of  Capt.  Lemuel  Harrison,  began  to 
make  wooden  clocks,  by  hand,  in  the  lower  room  of  the  academy  oi  school 
house*  on  the  green.  He  also  made  shoi  heels,  reels,  flyers  and  spools  for  spin- 
ning wheels,  window  sashes  and  chests  of  drawers,  and  carried  on  the  joinery 
business  generally.  David  Hoadley  and  Lemuel  Porter  were  in  his  employment. 
The  first  clock  which  I  find  charged  on  his  books  is  one  to  Major  Morris,  Jan.  1, 
1791,  at  £3  12s.     The  second  is  one  charged  to  Rev.  Mark  Leavenworth,  Feb.  2, 


*  The  academy  referred  to  stood  upon  the  south  mnrfrin  of  the  present  enclosed  green,  in 
front  of  Oapt.  Hunison's.  It  was  erected  to  meet  a  want  then  felt  of  accommodations  for  a 
hiL'her  grade  of  schools.  In  the  winter  of  17*4-5,  Joseph  Bulger  opened  a  school  for  you  ig 
ladies.  Till  then,  no  other  than  the  common  district  schools  had  been  taughi  in  the  town.  It 
flourished  for  a  time,  l>ut  did  not  sui  vive  long.  It  servedi_however,  to  awaken  an  interest  in 
favor  of  education.  An  attempt  was  made  to  put  up  a  huilding  for  an  academy,  by  subscription. 
TheTTame  was  raised  and  the  outside  covered,  but  here  the  means  provided  were  exhausted. 
When  the  enterprise  was  about  to  be  abandoned,  Stt-phen  Bionson,  Benjamin  Upson.  Dr  Isaac 
Baldwin  :ind  J.ihn  Curtis  pmpused  to  finish  the  house  on  condition  they  should  have  the  control 
Of  it  till  the  tnoney  they  sliodd  advance  was  refunded.  Thus  the  building  was  got  in  readiness 
for  occupation  in  tlie  fall  of  17S5  Two  schools  were  then  opened,  one  for  each  sex.  That  for 
girls  was  under  the  care  of  Mr.  Badger  above  mentioned.  David  Hale,  a  brother  of  Capt.  N^ithan 
Hale  of  Revolutionary  memory,  hnd  charge  of  the  boys  in  the  second  story.  Jeremiah  Day, 
late  president  of  Y  ile  College,  and  Bennet  Bronson  Wen^amQn,^_h|sjiupils.  The  schools  were  for 
a  time  very  pro-perous,  the  scholars  the  fir*t  winter  numbcing  about  one  hundred  and  fifty. 

After  a  time  the  schools  ran  down,  and  the  academy,  a  two  story  wood  building,  standing  in 
the  midst  of  what  appeared  to  be  a  flag  swamp,  with  .a  "gambrcl  roof "  and  a  hell  (the  first  in 
the  town)  on  the  summit,  was  removed.  It  was  removed  (before  the  new  meeing  house  was 
built)  to  make  wny  for  military  parades,  and  placed  on  the  line  of  the  road  just  west  of  Wil. 
liam  R.  Hitchcoi-k's.  Here  the  upper  ro  in  was  used  for  school:!  and  the  lower  for  re'i<rl.ius  and. 
town  meetings  Af  erwards,  the  building  was  cut  down  o  e  story,  and  the  bell  hung  in-ide  un- 
der the  roof.  Two  rooms  were  made  on  the  gmund  floor  separated  by  a  swing  partition.  In 
the  west  room,  a  private  school  was  occasionally  kept;  in  the  east,  a  district  school.  Here, 
more  than  forty  years  ago,  the  town  juveniles  learned  their  A  B  Cs.  Here,  as  in  ofher  places, 
the  ferule,  the  birch  rod,  the  dunce  block  and  the  closet  were  the  penalties  for  cutting  the 
benches,  making  up  wry  faces  and  putting  crooked  pins  in  t>ie  master's  chair. 

Twenty  years  ago,  the  school  house  was  removed  back  into  the  middle  of  the  'ot  and  fitted  up 
for  dwellings,  where  it  now  stands.  The  bell  was  removed  to  the  new  stone  arndemy  which  was 
erected  about  l>3fi,  on  the  ground  next  east  of  Capt.  Harrison's  house.  It  now  hargs  high  in 
the  belfry  of  the;"  high  schoo  "  building,  where,  once  more,  at  stated  intervals,  it  gives  out  its 
unwelcome  warning  to  reluctant  boys  and  giddy  girls. 


^93^ 


660  HISTORY   OF   WATERBURY. 

1791,  at  £4.  Capt.  Samuel  Judd  stands  debtor  for  the  third,  Feb.  19,  1791,  £4. 
The  last,  a  taverner,  is  credited  with  one  gin  sling,  7d.,  and  one  load  of  wood, 
2s.  6d. 

A  little  after  1800,  Harrison  commenced  work  in  a  little  shop  on  the  south  side 
of  North  Main  street,  on  the  Little  Brook.  He  constructed  a  water  wheel,  bring- 
ing the  water  to  it  in  logs  laid  across  the  road.  This  is  said  to  have  been  the 
first  water  wheel  for  driving  manufacturing  machinery  erected  in  Waterbury. 
(See  Waterbury  American.)  It  furnished  the  power  for  making  the  pinions  and 
wheel  teeth  and  other  parts  of  the  clock.  The  lease  of  the  land  (about  3(5  rods) 
on  whicTi  the  shop,  water  wheel  and  logs  already  existed,  bears  the  date  of  April* 
15,  1802.     It  was  given  by  Stephen  Bronson,  and  expired  in  seven  years. 

After  a  few  years,  the  business  passed  into  new  hands,  and  was  transferred  to  the 
site  of  the  lower  grist  mill,  on  Mad  River,  where  a  better  and  more  uniform  supply 
of  water  could  be  had.  Subsequently,  Harrison  removed  to  New  York,  where  he  died 
in  reduced  circumstances  In  its  new  location,  the  clock  business  was  carried  on, 
somewhat  extensively,  by  Col.  William  Leavenworth.  After  the  war  of  1812, 
however,  he  became  embarrassed  and  fled  the  State.  He  subsequently  lived  in 
Albany,  and  died  in  November,  1838.  His  factory  and  the  water  privilege,  after' 
a  long  interval,  were  purchased,  in  1830,  by  the  Beecher  Manufacturing  Co.,  and 
converted  into  a  broadcloth  mill.  This  company  failed,  and  the  property  is  now 
owned  by  the  American  Suspender  Co. 

About  1810,  the  late  Mark  Leavenworth,  in  company  with  Wm.  K.  Lamson 
and  Anson  Sperry,  1st,  commenced  the  manufacture  of  wooden  clocks  near  the 
beginning  of  the  Bucks  Hill  road,  where  he  afterwards  had  his  boarding 
house.  Subsequently,  Mr.  L.  occupied  a  shop  upon  the  brook  farther  to  the  east, 
and  extended  his  business. 

Except  some  silver  buttons  that  were  made  by  Joseph  Hopkins  at  an  early 
date,  (see  p.  411,)  the  first  metal  buttons  manufactured  in  Waterbury  are  under- 
stood to  have  been  made  before  1800,  of  block  tin  or  pewter,  by  Henry,  Samuel 
and  Silas  Grilley,  brothers,  on  Bunker  Hill.  The  buttons  were  cast  in  moulds, 
the  eyes  being  at  first  of  the  same  material ;  but  soon  an  improvement  was  intro- 
duced and  wire  eyes  were  employed. 

The  manufacture  of  gilt  buttons  (which  laid  the  foundation  of  the  brass  and  cop. , 
per  business)  was  begun  in  1802  by  Abel  Porter,  Daniel  Clark,  Silas  Grilley  and  Levi 
Porter,  under  the  partnership  name  of  Abel  Porter  &  Co.  (The  manufacturing  had 
been  previously  carried  on,  to  a  limited  extent  and  with  only  partial  success,  in 
Attleboroiigh,  Mass.)  The  company  commenced  operations  in  a  building  still 
standing  on  the  east  side  of  South  Main,  near  the  junction  of  Meadow  street.  It  took 
about  eighteen  months  to  get  the  business  started.  Levi  Porter  soon  sold  out  his 
interest  to  the  other  partners.  They  employed  eight  or  nine  hands,  all  Yankees, 
and  made  buttons  of  various  forms,  convex,  concave,  and  oval,  the  face  only 
being  gilded.  Gold  was  employed  liberally,  sometimes  $3  worth  being  applied  to 
a  gross,  for  which  they  obtained  as  much  as  ten  or  twelve  dollars.  Their  brass 
ingots  they  carried  into  the  west  part  of  Litchfield,  to  a  place  called  Bradley  ville, 
where  it  was  rolled  in  an  iron  mill.  The  metal  was  brought  back  in  strips  in  a 
very  rough  state,  and  passed  between  steel  rolls  two  inches  in  diameter  moved  by 
horse  power.  Thus  it  was  smoothed  and  finished.  All  the  other  work  was  done 
by  hand.     The  business  proved  profitable. 


APPENDIX.  561 

In  Sept.  1808,  David  Hay  den  became  a  partner,  and  the  company  bought  the  old 
mill  place  and  began  to  use  water  power.     In  August,  1809,  Silas  Grilley  sold  out 
to  his  partners.     Two  years  later,  the  latter  sold  out  to  Leavenworth,  Hayden  & 
Scovill,  as  mentioned  in  the  biographical  notice  of  Mr.  Scovill,  p.  429. 
'For  the  origin  of  the  brass  business,  see  the  notice  of  Dea.  Benedict,  p.  448. 

I  add  below  some  statistical  matters  relating  to  the  manufacturing  interests  of 
Waterbury.  Most  of  the  companies  mentioned  are  joint  stock  companies.  The 
list  is  not  supposed  to  be  entirely  complete,  but  it  will  give  some  notion  of  the 
magnitude  of  the  manufacturing  business  of  Waterbury. 

Benedict  &  Burnham  Manufacturing  Company;  manufacturers  of  brass  in 
sheets,  brass  and  copper  wire,  brass  tubing,  German  silver,  &c. ;  successors  of 
others  who  commenced  making  brass  in  1826,  wire  about  1831,  and  German  silver 
in  1834.  The  present  company  was  organized  in  1843.  Present  capital, 
$400,000.* 

Waterbury  Brass  Company;  manufacturers  of  brass  in  sheets,  brass  and  cop- 
per wire,  brass  kettles,  German  silver,  &c.  The  company  was  organized  in  April, 
1845,  and  has  a  present  capital  of  $300,000. 

Scovill  Manufacturing  Company;  manufacturers  of  rolled  and  sheet  brass, 
German  silver,  plated  metal,  brass  butts,  hinges,  daguerreotype  plates,  cases,  mat- 
tings, preservers,  &c.,  and  gilt  buttons.     Present  capital,  $300,000. f 

Brown  &  Brothers;  organized  under  the  joint  stock  law  in  1853;  manu- 
facturers of  sheet  brass  and  German  silver,  brass,  copper  and  German  silver  wire 
and  tubing,  brass  kettles,  copper  rivets  and  burrs.     Capital,  $200,000. 

Holmes,  Booth  &  Haydens.  The  company  manufactures  brass,  German  silver, 
plated  metal,  daguerreotype  plates,  mattings  and  preservers,  copper  and  German 
silver  wire,  &c.,  and  was  organized  Feb.  1853.      It  has  a  capital  of  $330,000. 

The  five  brass  and  copper  companies  named  in  the  preceding  list,  each  owning 
a  first  class  mill,  (the  Waterbury  Brass  Company  owns  two  mills,)  have  a  capital 
of  $1,530,000;  employ  on  an  average  775  hands;  pay  in  wages  $275,000  per 
annum;  consume  3,600  tons  of  coal  per  annum,  and  produce  about  $2,550,000 
worth  of  manufactured  goods  per  annum. 

American  Pin  Company  ;  manufacturers  of  pins  and  hooks  and  eyes;  was  organ- 
ized in  1846.  Present  capital,  $100,000.  The  making  of  hooks  and  eyes  was 
commenced  in  Waterbury  in  April,  1836,  by  Brown  &  Elton. 

Mattatuck  Manufacturing  Company.  It  was  organized  in  1847.  The  compa- 
ny made  cloth  buttons  till  1852.  It  then  began  the  manufacture  of  lamp  tubes, 
and  afterwards  of  silver  and  German  silver  thimbles,  brass  ferules,  umbrella  and 
parasol  furniture,  &c.     It  employs  $40,000  capital. 

Waterbury  Hook  and  Eye  Company;  manufacturers  of  hooks  and  eyes,  gilt 
brass  cornices  and  curtain  bands,  brass  curtain  fixtures,  copper  rivets,  brass  nails  and 
other  small  brass  wares.  The  company  was  organized  in  1849,  and  has  a  capital 
of  $55,000.  At  present  it  is  doubtful  whether  curtain  cornices  can  be  made  with 
a  profit  in  this  country,  no  attempt  hitherto  made  having   succeeded.     There  is 

*  For  a  more  particular  account  of  the  origin  and  history  of  the  business  of  this  company,  see 
the  biographical  notice  of  Aaron  Benedict,  page  •)48. 

+  For  a  more  particular  account  of  the  origin  and  history  of  the  business  of  this  company,  see 
the  biographical  sketch  of  J.  M.  L.  Scovill,  page  429. 

36 


562  HISTORY   OF   WATERBDRY. 

reasonable  ground  to  hope,  however,  that  the  Waterbury  Hook  and  Eye  Company 
will  be  successful. 

Watkrbury  Button  Company  ;  manufacturers  of  metal  buttons.  It  was  organ- 
ized in  1849,  but  the  business  was  commenced  in  1824,  by  A.  Benedict  and  others. 
It  employs  $45,000  capital. 

Lane  Manufacturing  Company  ;  was  organized  in  January,  1850,  and  makes 
buttons.     Capital,  $20,000. 

Waterbury  Knitting  Company  ;  manufacturers  of  shirts,  drawers,  and  half 
hose;  was  organized  in  1850.  It  commenced  with  a  capital  of  $100,000,  but  now 
employs  $200,000. 

Waterbury  Jewelry  Company  ;  manufacturers  of  buttons,  plated  ware,  forks, 
spoons,  butter  knives,  &c. ;  also,  belt  clasps  and  other  brass  goods ;  was  organized 
in  1851.     Present  capital,  $30,000. 

Blake  &  Johnson  ;  manufacturers  of  hardened  steel  rolls,  machinery  to  order, 
hair  pins,  rivets,  &c. ;  was  organized  Feb.  1852.     Present  capital,  $16,000. 

Oakville  Company;  was  organized  in  1852,  and  manufactures  solid  headed 
pins.     Its  present  capital  is  $75,000. 

William  R.  Hitchcock  &  Company.  The  company  was  organized  in  1852,  and 
manufactures  covered  buttons  and  hooks  and  eyes.  The  business  (that  of  making 
covered  buttons)  was  commenced  in  1837,  by  Wm.  R.  Hitchcock,  J.  M.  L.  Scovill  and 
W.  H.  Scovill,  under  the  name  of  W.  R.  Hitchcock  &  Co.  The  present  capital  is 
$35,000. 

American  Ring  Company.  The  company  was  organized  in  1852  ;  manufactures 
hollow  rings  from  brass  and  tin,  saddle,  harness  and  carriage  hardware,  and  buttons 
of  all  kinds;  has  a  capital  of  $16,000. 

E.  Robinson  &  Son.  The  company  was  organized  in  1852;  makes  cloth  but- 
tons and  has  a  capital  of  $4,000. 

Waterbury  Buckle  Company;  organized  1853;  manufactures  buckles,  belt 
clasps,  steel  ornaments,  &c.     Present  capital,  $29,900. 

Waterbury  Gas  Light  Company;  organized  in  1854;  furnishes  gas  from  coal. 
Capital,  $100,000 ;  tons  of  coal  consumed  per  annum,  about  500. 

F.  M.  Perkins  &  Company;  organized  in  1854;  manufacturers  of  ivory  and 
steel  carriage  trimmings,  and  fine  pearl  coat  and  vest  buttons.  Present  capital, 
$20,000. 

Charles  W.  Johnson.  The  company  was  organized  in  1855,  and  produces 
machinery  of  all  kinds.     Present  capital,  $3,000. 

H.  A.  Matthews  ;  bought  out  the  Hope  Manufacturing  Company  in  1856,  and 
manufactures  carriage  and  harness  trimmings. 

American  Suspender  Company;  present  organization  in  Jan.  1857;  manu- 
facturers of  suspenders.  The  business  was  commenced  by  the  Hotchkiss  &  Merri- 
man  Manufacturing  Company,  in  1843.     Present  capital,  $180,000. 

Farrel  Foundry  and  Machine  Company  ;  manufacturers  of  iron  and  brass  cast- 
ings, machinery,  heavy  mill  gearing,  shafts,  &c.  The  company  was  organized  in 
1857,  and  has  a  capital  of  $40,000.  The  business  was  commenced  by  "  The 
Foundry  Company,"  in  1851. 

Waterbury  Clock  Company;  manufacturers  of  clocks  and  time  pieces ;  organ- 
ized in  1857  ;  cap'.tal,  $60,000. 

American  Flask  and  Cap  Company  ;  manufacturers  of  powder  flasks,  shot  belts, 
shot  pouches,  gun  wads,  percussion  caps,  dram  flasks,  measuring  tapes,  &c.  The 
company  was  organized  in  April,  1857,  and  has  a  capital  of  $125,000. 


APPENDIX.  563 

Union  Kxittixg  Company  ;  manufacturers  of  woolen  wrappers,  drawers,  &c., 
having  a  capital  of  ^50,000. 

City  Manufacturing  Company  ;  manufacturers  of  patent  lamp  tops,  lamp  tubes, 
&c.,  having  a  capital  of  $10,000. 

Hayden  Manufacturing  Company  ;  metal  button  makers,  &c.,  having  a  capital 
of  $S,000. 

D.  B.  HuRD.  He  manufactures  button  eyes,  button  backs,  window  blinds,  sta- 
ples, &c.,  and  employs  a  capital  of  $10,000. 

B.  H.  Morse.  He  manufactures  pocket  cutlery,  and  employs  a  capital  of 
$50,000. 

L.  Pritchard.     He  makes  buttons,  and  employs  a  capital  of  $10,000. 

All  the  companies  and  business  firms  above  named,  have  an  aggregate  capital 
of  about  $2,908,000;  employ  on  an  average  about  2,730  hands  ;  pay  in  wages,  per 
annum,  about  $760,000 ;  consume  annually  about  7,600  tons  of  hard  coal,  and 
manufacture  goods  to  the  amount  of  about  $4,300,000  per  year. 


Waterbury  belonged  to  Hartford  County  till  May,  17 '28,  when  it  was  annexed 
to  New  Haven  County.  ^— — 

Till  Oct.  1719,  the  probate  business  of  Waterbury  was  done  in  the  County 
Court  of  Hartford.  At  that  time,  the  Woodbury  District  was  formed  and  Water- 
bury annexed  to  it.  In  May,  1779,  Waterbury  was  made  into  a  distinct  district. 
The  district  now  comprehends  Waterbury,  Wolcott,  Middlebury  and  Naugatuck. 
Plymouth  was  made  a  new  district  in  1833,  and  Watertown  in  1834.  Prospect  at 
present  belongs  to  the  Cheshire  district,  and  Oxford  is  a  district  by  itself. 

Judges  of  Probate  of  tJie  District  of  Waterbury,  and  the  dates  of  their 

Appointment. 
1779,     Joseph  Hopkins.  1843,     Alfred  Blackman. 

1801,     John  Kingsbury.  1844,     Norton  J.  Buel. 

1830,     Joel  Hinman.  1846,     AVillard  Spencer. 

1840,     Norton  J.  Buel.  1847,     Norton  J.  Buel. 

1842,     John  Peck. 
Since  1849,  the  Probate  judges  have  been  chosen  by  the  people. 

Recorders  or  Town  Clerks  of  Waterbury,  with  the  dates  of  their  Appointment. 


John  Stanley. 

1787, 

William  Leavenworth. 

1696, 

Thomas  Judd,  Jr. 

1793, 

John  Kingsbury. 

1709, 

Dea.  Thomas  Judd. 

1804, 

Abner  Johnson. 

1712, 

John  Hopkins. 

1806, 

Ashley  Scott, 

1713, 

John  Judd. 

1812, 

John  Kingsbury. 

1717, 

William  Judd. 

1817, 

Ashley  Scott. 

1721, 

John  Southmayd. 

1831, 

Elisha  S.  Abernethy. 

1755, 

Thomas  Clark. 

1837, 

Willard  Spencer. 

1764, 

Ezra  Bronson. 

1839, 

Charles  Scott. 

1782, 

Michael  Bronson. 

1840, 

Norton  J.  Buel. 

1784, 

Asahel  Clark. 

1841, 

Solomon  B.  Minor. 

564 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 


Waterbury  Lists. 


Year. 


Persons. 


Estate. 


1690, 

37, 

£1,893. 

1691, 

43, 

1,859. 

1692, 

43, 

1,640. 

1693, 

46, 

1,630. 

1694, 

43, 

1,554. 

1695, 

— , 

1696, 

40, 

1,562. 

1697, 

42, 

1,640. 

1698, 

49, 

1,742. 

1699, 

47, 

1,700. 

1700, 

48, 

1,871. 

1701, 

50, 

1,994. 

1702, 

52, 

2,050. 

1703, 

57, 

2,145. 

1704, 

52, 

2,261. 

1705, 

62, 

2,047. 

1706, 

55, 

2,165,  10s 

1707, 

49, 

1,958. 

1708, 

50, 

2,108. 

1709, 

43, 

2,119. 

1710, 

2,159. 

1711, 

2,218. 

1712, 

2,415. 

1713, 

2,154. 

1714, 

2,070,  lis 

1715, 

2,115,  16. 

1716, 

2,289.  8. 

1717, 

2,414,  10. 

1718, 

2,599,  11. 

1719, 

2,646, 

1720, 

2,757,  5. 

1721, 

2,762,  11. 

1722, 

3,077,  15. 

1723, 

3,427,  11. 

1724, 

3,573,  11. 

1725, 

3,812,  6. 

1726, 

4,002,  7, 

1727, 

4,234,  11, 

1728, 

4,534,  18. 

1729, 

4,879,  15. 

1730, 

5,024,  15. 

1731, 

6,392,  15. 

1732, 

6,742. 

1733, 

7,146,  19. 

1734, 

7,951,  8. 

1735, 
1736, 

8,092. 

1737, 

8,377,  13. 

1738, 

8,405,  2. 

8d. 


Year. 

1739, 
1740, 
1741, 
1742, 
1743, 
1744, 
1745, 
1746, 
1747, 
1748, 
1749, 
1750, 
1751, 
1752, 
1753, 
1754, 
1755, 
1756, 
1757, 
1758, 
1759, 
1760, 
1761, 
1762, 
1763, 
1764, 
1765, 
1766, 
1767, 
1768, 
1769, 
1770, 
1771, 
1772, 
1773, 
1774, 
1775, 
1776, 
1777, 
1778, 
1779, 
1780, 
1781, 
1782, 
1783, 
1784, 
1786, 
1788, 


Estate. 


I   8,830,  lis 

9,446,  9. 

9,491,  5. 

10,174,  3. 

10,693,  0, 

6d. 

11,209,  6, 

9- 

12,492,  7. 

13,380. 

13,790,  18. 

15,277,  1, 

6. 

15,674,  2, 

5. 

16,910,  3, 

3. 

17,762,  10, 

6. 

18,632,  14, 

10. 

17,635,  18, 

7. 

20,953,  15, 

3. 

20,862,  13, 

3. 

21,837,  17, 

6. 

23,145,  13, 

8. 

23,204,  0, 

6. 

24,395,  8, 

5. 

23,853,  11, 

6. 

25,208,  18. 

26,107,  19, 

5. 

25,304,  10, 

4. 

25,939,  10, 

9. 

28,101,  4, 

8. 

27,959,  17, 

3. 

30,660,  17, 

9. 

32,291,  14, 

6. 

33,386,  8, 

4. 

35,364,  19, 

10. 

35,806,  2, 

5. 

35,110,  5, 

1. 

36,146,  7, 

5. 

39,826,  18. 

41,243,  2, 

9. 

37,756,  3, 

6. 

40,455,  5, 

3. 

38,504,  18, 

9. 

42,499,  6, 

6. 

19,784,  12, 

8i. 

20,534,  6. 

19,230. 

17,015,  5. 

16,795,  14, 

10. 

565 


A  List  of  the  Polls  and  Ratable  Estate  of  Waferbury  in  1737. 


(The  polls  of  persons  over  70  years  of  age  were  not  taxable  after 

Gideon  Allyn, 
John  Andruss, 
Nathaniel  Arnold, 
Nathaniel  Arnold,  Jr., 
William  Andruss, 
John  Alcock, 


Samuel  Barnes, 
Ebenezer  Bronson, 
Joseph  Bronson, 
Ebenezer  Baldwin, 
Thomas  Bronson,  Jr., 
Lieut.  Thomas  Bronson, 
Moses  Bronson, 
John  Bronson,  Jr., 
James  Brown, 
James  Baldwin, 
Thomas  Blakeslee, 
Lieut.  John  Bronson, 
John  Barnes, 
Thomas  Barnes, 
James  Blakeslee, 
Ephraim  Bissell, 
Jonathan  Baldwin, 
Josiah  Bronson, 
Isaac  Bronson, 
Isaac  Bronson,  Jr., 
Samuel  Bronson, 
Nathan  Beard, 

Isaac  Castle, 
Daniel  Curtiss, 
Henry  Cook, 
Thomas  Clark, 
Caleb  Clark, 
Samuel  Camp, 
Nathan  Coxwell, 

Ebenezer  EhvcU, 

Jonathan  Foot, 
Barnabas  Ford, 
Thomas  Foot, 
Samuel  Frost, 
Gershom  Fulford, 

Jonathan  Garnsey, 
John  Garnsey, 
Nathaniel  Gunn, 

Stephen  Hopkins, 
Thomas  Hickox, 
John  How, 
John  Humaston, 
Nathan  Hubbard, 


£74, 

12s. 

85. 

85, 

2, 

46. 

22. 

45, 

4. 

66, 

2. 

89, 

n! 

69, 

6. 

34, 

8. 

54. 

105, 

14. 

68. 

105. 

127. 

65, 

6. 

63, 

16. 

161. 

65, 

9. 

60, 

8. 

63, 

18. 

26, 

10. 

59, 

9. 

34, 

18. 

77 

4. 

50, 

8. 

47, 

12. 

64. 

41. 

33. 

66. 

116. 

•i7. 

10. 

93, 

2. 

21. 

74. 

62. 

57, 

10. 

94. 

32. 

53, 

16. 

78, 

12. 

52. 

117, 

15. 

181. 

77 

14. 

41, 

12. 

39. 

26, 

10. 

Isaac  Hopkins, 
Stephen  Hopkins,  Jr., 
Daniel  How, 
James  Hull, 
Samuel  Hickox, 
Timothy  Hopkins, 
Wid.  Mary  Hickox, 
Gideon  Hickox, 
William  Hickox, 

Thomas  Judd, 
Thomas  Judd, 
Ebenezer  Judd, 
John  Judd, 
Silas  Johnson, 
Robert  Johnson, 
John  Johnson, 
William  Judd, 
Joseph  Judd, 
Samuel  Judd, 

Stephen  Kelsey, 
Jonathan  Kelsey, 

Joseph  Lewis, 
Samuel  Lewis, 
John  Lewis, 

Amos  Matthews, 
Thomas  Matthews, 
Natluuiirl  Merrel, 
Benjamin  More, 
George  Nichols, 

Nathan  Prindle, 
Thomas  Porter, 
Ebenezer  Porter, 
Daniel  Porter, 
John  Punderson, 
James  Porter, 
Timothy  Porter, 
James  Prichard, 
Jeremiah  Peck, 
Jonathan  Prindle, 

Phineas  Royce, 
Ebenezer  Richards, 
Thomas  Richards, 
Ebenezer  Richason, 
John  Richason, 
Hezekiah  Rew, 
Obadiah  Richards, 
Mary  Richards, 

John  ScoviU, 


May,  1721.) 

£49,  12s. 

82. 

30,     6. 

44. 

63,  18. 
151. 
151,     8. 

60,  12. 

97,  18. 

6,  14. 

45,  10. 
22,  19. 

39,  12. 
43,  8. 
9. 
103,  4. 
38,  4. 
30,  18. 

46,  14. 

30. 

153. 
41. 

42,  4. 

35. 
49,     2. 

2^■. 
21. 
71,  10. 

18. 
54. 

41. 
52,     6. 

3,  12. 
62,  14. 
30,  6. 
55,  4. 
69,  4. 
95,  10 

31. 

38,  10. 
95,  12. 
92. 

43,  6. 


566 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURT. 


y 


Jonathan  Scott,     ) 
son  of  Edmund,  \ 

£63,  16s. 

John  Welton, 

£  6. 

John  Warner,  tailor. 

98,     Is 

Gershom  Scott, 

58,    8. 

Dr.  John  Warner, 

63,     2. 

Eleazer  Scott, 

59. 

Richard  Welton,  Jr., 

50,  17. 

Samuel  Scott,  Sen., 

83,    6. 

Daniel  Williams, 

42,  12. 

John  Sutliff, 

91,    4. 

Eliakim  Welton, 

25,     6. 

John  SutHff,  Jr., 

22,  18. 

Richard  Welton, 

63. 

Jonathan  Scott, 

36,  12. 

Thomas  Welton, 

25. 

Jonathan  Scott,  Jr., 

64. 

George  Welton, 

65. 

Daniel  Scott, 

23,  12. 

Ebenezer  Warner,  ) 
son  of  John,        f 

26,    4. 

Joseph  Smith, 

22. 

John  Smith, 

97,'    4. 

Stephen  Welton,  Jr., 

32. 

James  Smith, 

29. 

James  AVilliams, 

22. 

Edward  Scovill, 

40,  10. 

Benjamin  Warner, 

56,  18. 

John  Scott, 

23,  18. 

Samuel  Warner, 
son  of  Daniel, 

55,     8. 

Stephen  Scott, 

38. 

Obadiah  Scott, 

37,  18. 

Samuel  Warner, 

18,    4. 

WilHam  Scovill, 

72,  10. 

Ebenezer  Warner,  3d, 

35. 

David  Scott 

65,  18. 

Joseph  Weed, 

40. 

Samuel  Scott,         ) 
son  of  George,  \ 

42,  18. 

Ebenezer  Welton, 

26. 

Ebenezer  Warner,   \ 
son  of  Daniel,       j 

39,  12. 

WiUiam  Scott, 

39. 

Stephen  Welton,  Sen., 

55,    4. 

Samuel  Thomas, 

34,    4. 

Abraham  Warner, 

41. 

Samuel  Towner, 

88. 

Jonas  Weed, 

35. 

Josiah  Terrill, 

66,  17. 

Obadiah  Warner, 

47. 

Caleb  Thomson, 

40,  12. 

John  Weed, 

40,    7. 

Stephen  Upson, 

114. 

Ephraim  Warner, 

28,  12. 

TOPULATION    01 

Waterbury. 

1688,                         about             180. 

1790, 

2,937. 

1694, 

165.* 

1800, 

3,256. 

1713, 

180. 

1810, 

2,874. 

1727, 

'                  850. 

1820, 

2,822. 

1734, 

450. 

1830, 

3,070. 

1737, 

900. 

1840, 

3,668. 

1749, 

1,500. 

1845, 

3,395. 

1756, 

1,829. 

1850, 

5,137. 

1774, 

3,536. 

1790, 
1800, 
1810, 


Population  of  Watertown,  (incorporated  1780.) 
3,170.  .  I  1820,        1,439.    I  1840, 


1,615. 
1,714. 


1,500. 


1850, 


1,442. 
1,533. 


1800, 
1810, 


Population  of  Plymouth,  (incorporated  1795.) 


1,791. 


1820, 
1 830, 


1,758. 
2,064. 


1840, 

1850, 


2,205. 
2,568. 


1800, 
1810, 


Population  of  Wolcott,  (incorporated  1796.) 


948. 
952. 


1820, 
1830, 


943. 
844. 


1840, 
1850, 


603. 


*  The  Wads  worth  manuscript  says  that  in  1694,  "  Waterbury  was  a  small  town,  though  very 
compact.    It  contained  twenty-five  families." — [Barber's  Historical  Collections  of  Connecticut, 


APPENDIX. 


56T 


Population  of  Oxford,  (incorporated  1198.) 
1800,        1,400.    I  18-20,       1,G83.    I  1840,       1,626. 
1810,       1,453.     1830,       1,762.     1850,       1,562. 


Population  of  Middleburt,  (incorporated  1807.) 
1810,         847.    I  1830,         816.    I  1850,         763. 
1820,         838.    I  1840,        761.    | 

Population  of  Prospect,  (incorporated  1827.) 

1830,         651.     1840,        548.     1850,        674. 

Population  of  Naugatuck,  (incorporated  1844.) 

1850,  1720. 


Commissioners  for  Waterbury. 


May. 

161)0,  Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 

91,  Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 

92,  Ens.  Tiiomas  Judd. 

93,  Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 


1694,  Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 

95,  Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 

96,  Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 

97,  Mr.  Thomas  Judd. 


Justices  of  the  Peace. 


rol,  Lt.  Thomas  Judd. 

2,  Lt.  Thomas  Judd. 

3,  Lt.  Thomas  Judd. 

4,  [Ens.  Timothy  Stanley  ?] 

5,  Ens.  [or  Dea.]  Thomas  Judd. 

7,  Thomas  Judd,  Esq. 

8,  Mr.  Thomas  Judd. 

9,  Mr.  Thomas  Judd. 
10,  Dea.  Thomas  Judd. 

14,  Mr.  Thomas  Judd. 

15,  Mr.  Tiiomas  Judd. 

16,  Capt.  Tiiomas  Judd. 

17,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd. 

18,  Capt.  Tiiomas  Judd. 

19,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd. 

20,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd. 

21,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd. 

22,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd. 

23,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd. 

24,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd. 

25,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Jolin  Hoplvins. 

26,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Hoplvins. 

27,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Hoplvins. 

28,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Hoplvins. 

29,  Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Hopkins. 

30,  [Record  worn.] 

31,  Mr.  Thomas  Judd. 

32,  Mr.  Thomas  Judd. 

33,  Mr.  Thomas  Judd. 

34,  Capt.  Timothy  Hopkins. 

35,  Mr.  Timothy  Hopkins. 

36,  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Thomas  Clark. 

37,  Timothy  Hopkins, 


1737    Thomas  Clark. 

38,  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Thomas  Clark. 

39,  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Thomas  Clark. 

40,  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Thomas  Clark, 
John  Southmayd. 

41,  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Thomas  Clark, 
John  Southmayd. 

42,  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Thomas  Clark, 
Samuel  Hickox. 

43,  Samuel  Hickox. 

44,  Samuel  Hickox. 

45,  Samuel  Hickox. 

46,  Thomas  Clark. 

47,  John  Southmayd, 
Thomas  Clark, 
Thomas  Matthews. 

48,  John  Southmayd, 
Thomas  Clark, 
Thomas  Matthews. 

49,  John  Southmayd, 
Thomas  Clark, 
Thomas  Matthews. 

50,  John  Southmayd, 
Thomas  Clark,' 
Thomas  Matthews. 

51,  John  Southmayd, 
Thomas  Clark, 
Thomas  Matthews. 

52,  John  Southmayd, 
Thomas  Clark, 
Thomas  Matthews, 
Daniel  Southmayd. 

53,  John  Southmayd, 
Thomas  Clark, 


568 


HISTORY    OF   WATERBURY. 


53, 

Thomas  Matthews, 

1769,  Timothy  Judd. 

Daniel  Southmayd. 

70,  Thomas  Matthews, 

54, 

John  Southmayd, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Thomas  Clark, 

Caleb  Humaston, 

Thomas  Matthews. 

Timothy  Judd, 

65, 

Thomas  Clark, 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

John  Southmayd, 

71,  Thomas  Matthews, 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Thomas  Bronson,  Jr. 

Timothy  Judd, 

56, 

Thomas  Clark, 

Caleb  Humaston, 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

Thomas  Bronson. 

Samuel  Lewis. 

5*7, 

Thomas  Matthews, 

72,  Thomas  Matthews, 

Thomas  Clark, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Thomas  Bronson,  Jr. 

Timothy  Judd, 

58, 

Thomas  Clark, 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

Thomas  Bronson, 

Samuel  Lewis. 

Thomas  Matthews. 

73,  Thomas  Matthews, 

59, 

Thomas  Clark, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Timothy  Judd, 

Thomas  Bronson. 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

60, 

Thomas  Clark, 

Samuel  Lewis. 

Thomas  Matthews, 

74,  Thomas  Matthews, 

William  Hoadley. 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

61, 

Thomas  Clark, 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Timothy  Judd, 

John  Hopkins. 

Samuel  Lewis. 

62 

Thomas  Clark, 

75,  Thomas  Matthews, 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

Caleb  Humaston. 

Timothy  Judd, 

63, 

Thomas  Clark, 

Samuel  Lewis. 

Thomas  Matthews, 
Joseph  Hopkins, 

hr- 

77,  Thomas  Clark, 

Caleb  Humaston. 

Thomas  Matthews, 

64, 

Thomas  Clark, 

Timothy  Judd, 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Samuel  Lewis. 

Caleb  Humaston. 

78,  Thomas  Clark, 

65 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Timothy  Judd, 

Caleb  Humaston, 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

Timothy  Judd. 

Samuel  Lewis. 

66 

Thomas  Matthews, 

79,  Thomas  Clark, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Caleb  Humaston, 

Timothy  Judd, 

Timothy  Judd. 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

67 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Samuel  Lewis, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Phineas  Eoyce. 

Caleb  Humaston, 

80,  Thomas  Clark, 

Timothy  Judd, 

Samuel  Lewis, 

Stephen  Upson. 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

68 

Thomas  Matthews, 

Ezra  Bronson. 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

81,  Thomas  Clark, 

Caleb  Humaston, 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

Timothy  Judd, 

Samuel  Lewis, 

Stephen  Upson. 

Ezra  Bronson. 

69 

Thomas  Matthews, 

82,  Thomas  Clark, 

Joseph  Hopkins, 

Samuel  Lewis, 

Caleb  Humaston, 

Jonathan  Baldwin, 

APPENDIX. 


509 


Ezra  Bronson. 
Thomas  Clark, 
Jonathan  Baldwin, 
Samuel  Lewis, 
Ezra  Bronson, 
Thomas  Clark, 
Jonathan  Baldwin, 
Samuel  Lewis, 
Ezra  Bronson. 
85,  Thomas  Clark, 
Jonathan  Baldwin, 


84 


1785,  Samuel  Lewis, 
Ezra  Bronson. 

86,  Thomas  Clark, 
Jonathan  Baldwin, 
Samuel  Lewis, 
Ezra  Bronson. 

87,  Thomas  Clark, 
Samuel  Lewis, 
Ezra  Bronson, 
John  Welton. 


Deputies  to  the  General  Court. 


1689, 
90, 
91, 
92, 
93, 
94, 
95, 
96, 


99, 

170(1, 

1, 


May  Session. 
Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 
Lt.  John  Stanley, 
Ens.  Thomas  Jiidd, 
Ens.  Thomas  Judd, 
Lieut.  John  Stanley, 
Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 
Sergt.  Timothy  Stanley. 
Lieut.  Thomas  Judd, 
Ens.  Timothy  Stanley, 
Lieut.  Thomas  Judd, 
Sergt.  Isaac  Bronson, 
Lieut.  Thomas  Judd, 
Ens.  Timothy  Stanley, 
Lieut  Thomas  Judd, 
Lieut.  Thomas  Judd, 
Dea.  Thomas  Judd, 

2,  Lieut.  Thomas  Judd, 
Dea.  Judd, 

3,  Dea.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  Benjamin  Barnes, 

4,  Mr.  John  Hopkins, 

5,  Ens.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Upson, 

6,  Mr.  Thomas  Judd, 


8,  Mr. 
Mr. 

9,  Mr. 
Mr. 

10,  Mr. 
Mr. 

11,  Mr. 
Mr. 

12,  Mr. 
Mr. 

13,  Mr. 
Mr. 

14,  Mr. 
Mr. 

15,  Mr. 
Mr. 


Timothy  Stanley, 
Thomas  Judd, 
Timothy  Stanley, 
Thomas  Judd, 
John  Hopkins, 
Stephen  L^pson, 
Timothy  Stanley, 
John  Hopkins, 
John  Hopkins, 
Abraham  Andrews 
Thomas  Judd, 
John  Hopkins, 
John  Hopkins, 
John  Scovill, 
Thomas  Judd, 
John  Hopkins, 


October  Session. 

Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 
Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 
Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 
Ens.  Thomas  Judd. 
Timothy  Stanley. 

Lieut,  Thomas  Judd, 

Dea.  Thomas  Judd. 

Lieut.  Thomas  Judd, 

Dea.  Thomas  Judd. 

Lieut.  Thomas  Judd. 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd. 

Lieut.  Thomas  Judd. 

Lieut.  Thomas  Judd, 

Sergt.  Isaac  Bronson. 

Lieut.  Thomas  Judd, 

Dea.  Thomas  Judd. 

Ens.  [or  Dea.]  Thomas  Judd, 

Thomas  Judd. 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd, 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd,  Jr. 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd, 

Thomas  Judd. 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd,  Senr. 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd,  Junr. 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd, 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd,  Junr. 

Mr.  Timothy  Stanley, 

Mr.  John  Hopkins. 

Mr.  Timothy  Stanley, 

Mr.  John  Hopkins.  ' 

Mr.  John  Hopkins, 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd. 

Mr.  Timothy  Stanley, 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd. 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd, 

Mr.  Stephen  L^pson. 

Mr.  John  Hopkins, 

Mr.  Joseph  Lewis. 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd, 

Mr.  Ephraim  Warner. 

Mr.  Thomas  Judd, 

Mr.  John  Hopkins. 


570 


HISTORY    OF    WATERBURY. 


1716, 

18, 
19, 
20, 
21, 
22 
23, 
24, 
25, 
26, 
27, 
28, 
29, 
30, 
31, 
32, 
33, 
34, 
35, 
36, 
37, 
38, 
39, 
40, 
41, 
42, 
43, 
44, 
45, 


May  Session. 
Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Lieut.  John  Hopkins. 
Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  Ephraim  Warner, 
Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  Ephraim  Warner, 
Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  Ephraim  Warner, 
Mr.  Jeremiah  Peck, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis, 
Mr.  Ephraim  Warner, 
Mr.  Richard  Welton, 
Mr.  John  Richards, 
Mr.  Isaac  Bronson, 
Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  Thomas  Hick  ox, 
Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Hopkins, 
Mr.  John  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Thomas  Hickox, 
Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 

Capt.  William  Hickox, 
Mr.  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Mr.  William  Judd, 
Mr.  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Mr.  William  Judd, 
Capt.  William  Hickox, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis, 
Capt.  William  Judd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  William  Judd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 

Capt.  William  Judd, 
Mr.  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Mr.  John  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  John  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  John  Southmayd, 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 
Mr.  John  Southmayd, 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 
Mr.  John  Southmayd, 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews, 
Mr.  John  Scovill, 


October  Session. 


Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Hopkins. 
Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  Timothy  Stanley. 
Capt.  Thomas  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Hopkins. 
Mr.  Jeremiah  Peck, 
Mr.  Ephraim  Warner. 
Mr.  John  Hopkins, 
Mr.  William  Hickox. 
Mr.  Thomas  Hickox. 

Mr.  John  Bronson, 
Mr.  Thomas  Hickox. 
Mr.  Thomas  Hickox. 

Mr.  Joseph  Lewis, 
Mr.  Thomas  Hickox. 
Mr.  John  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis. 
Mr.  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Thomas  Clark. 
Mr.  Thomas  Clark. 

Mr.  William  Judd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Upson. 
Mr.  William  Judd, 
Mr.  Timothy  Hopkins. 
Joseph  Lewis, 
Stephen  Hopkins. 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins. 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.    Isaac  Barnes. 
Mr.  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Samuel  Brown. 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis. 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Thomas  Clark. 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis. 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis. 
Capt.  William  Judd, 
Mr.  Timothy  Hopkins. 
Mr.  John  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins. 
Mr.  John  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Joseph  Lewis. 
Mr.  John  Southmayd, 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox. 
Mr.  John  Southmayd, 
Capt.  Stephen  Upson. 
Mr.  John  Southmayd. 

Mr.  Thomas  Matthews. 


APPENDIX. 


571 


May  Session. 
1746,  Mr.  Joseph  Bronson, 
Mr.  Timothy  Judd, 
4*7,  Capt  Timothy  Hopkins, 


Capt.  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Mr.  James  Baldwin, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 
Mr.  Timothy  Judd, 
Capt.  Daniel  Sonthmayd, 
Capt.  Daniel  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Jonathan  Garnsey, 
Capt.  Daniel  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews, 
Mr.  Ephraim  Warner, 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews, 
Mr.  Gideon  Hotchkiss, 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  Gideon  Hotchkiss, 
Mr.  John  Lewis, 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews, 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews, 
Mr.  John  Lewis, 
Capt  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Lewis, 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Upson,  Jr. 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Stephen  Upson, 
Mr.  Jonathan  Baldwin, 


68,  Capt.  Jonathan  Baldwin, 
Mr.  Samuel  Hickox, 

n9,  Capt.  Jonathan  Baldwin, 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 

70,  Mr.  Thomas  Matthews, 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 

71,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews, 

72,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 

73,  Capt.  Jonathan  Baldwin, 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 

74,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Jonathan  Baldwin, 

75,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Jonathan  Baldwin, 


October  Session. 
Capt.  Timothy  Hopkins. 

Capt.  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Mr.  James  Baldwin. 
Capt.  Timothy  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Daniel  Southmayd. 
Capt.  Daniel  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Timothy  Judd. 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Timothy  Judd. 
Capt.  Daniel  Southmayd, 
Mr.  John  Warner. 
Capt.  Daniel  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Ephraim  Warner. 
Capt.  Daniel  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Timothy  Judd. 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Caleb  Humaston. 
Mr.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  Thomas  Bronson,  Jr. 
Mr.  Gideon  Hotchkiss. 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews, 
Mr.  Gideon  Hotchkiss. 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  Stephen  Hopkins. 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews. 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews, 
Mr.  John  Lewis. 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 
Capt.  George  Nichols. 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  John  Lewis. 
Mr.  Ephraim  Warner, 
Mr.  Stephen  Upson,  Jr. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Blr.  Ephraim  Warner. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Steplien  Upson. 
Mr.  Jonathan  Baldwin, 
Mr.  Samuel  Lewis. 
Capt.  Jonathan  Baldwin, 
Mr.  Samuel  Hickox. 
Mr.  Samuel  Hickox, 
Capt.  Jonathan  Baldwin. 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 
Capt.  Jonathan  Baldwin. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Thomas  Matthews. 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd, 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Timothy  Judd. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Jonathan  Baldwin. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Jonathan  Baldwin. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Ezra  Bronson. 


572 


HISTOKY    OF   WATEKBURY. 


May  Session. 
1716,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Ezra  Brouson, 

77,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Ezra  Bronson, 

78,  Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Capt.  Ezra  Bronson, 

79,  Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Capt.  Ezra  Bronson, 

80,  Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Capt.  Jotham  Curtiss, 

81,  Mr.  Abner  Johnson, 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 

82,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Abner  Johnson. 

83,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Col.  Phineas  Porter, 

84,  Mr.  Eli  Bronson, 
Capt.  John  Welton, 

85,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton, 

86,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton, 

87,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton, 

88,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton, 

89,  Capt.  Isaac  Bronson, 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 

90,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton, 

91,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  John  Welton, 

92,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Isaac  Bronson, 

93,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Isaac  Bronson,  Jr. 

94,  Mr.  Isaac  Baldwin, 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 

95,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Aaron  Benedict, 

96,  Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  John  Kingsbury, 

97,  Mr.  John  Kingsbury, 

Mr.  William  Leavenworth, 

98,  Mr.  John  Kingsbury, 
Mr.  Jared  Byington, 

99,  Mr.  Richard  "Welton, 
Mr.  Ethel  Bronson, 

1800,  Mr.  Richard  Welton, 
Mr.  Ethel  Bronson, 

1,  Mr.  John  Kingsbury, 
Mr.  Ard  Welton, 

2,  Mr.  Ard  Welton, 
Mr.  Ethel  Bronson, 

3,  Mr.  John  Kingsbury, 
Mr.  Ethel  Bronson,'* 


October  Session. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Ezra  Bronson. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  Ezra  Bronson. 
Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Capt.  Ezra  Bronson. 
Capt.  Jotham  Curtiss, 
Thomas  Fenn. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Samuel  Lewis. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins. 


Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Eli  Bronson. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Capt.  John  Welton. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  John  Welton. 
Mr.  Isaac  Bronson, 
Mr.  Isaac  Baldwin. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  John  Welton. 
Mr.  Isaac  Baldwin, 
Mr.  John  Lewis. 
Mr.  Joseph  Hopkins, 
Mr.  Aaron  Benedict. 
Mr.  John  Kingsbury, 
Mr.  William  Leavenworth. 
Mr.  John  Kingsbury, 
Mr.  Jared  Byington. 
Mr.  Jared  Byington, 
Mr.  Richard  AVelton. 
Mr.  Richard  Welton, 
Mr.  Ethel  Bronson. 
Mr.  Ard  Welton, 
Mr.  James  Scovill. 
Mr.  John  Kingsbury, 
Mr.  Ethel  Bronson. 
Mr.  Ard  Welton, 
Mr.  Abner  Johnson. 
Mr.  Abner  Johnson, 
Mr.  Timothy  Gibbard. 


*  In  the  Connecticut  Courant  of  the  time,  Ethel  Bronson  and   James  Scovill  are  named  as  the 
epresentatives  of  Wateibury  in  May,  1803. 


APPENDIX. 

May  Session. 

October  Session . 

1804, 

Mr.  Abner  Johnson, 

Mr.  John  Kingsbury, 

Mr.  Timothy  Gibbard, 

Mr.  Eli  Bronson. 

5, 

Mr.  Eli  Bronson, 

Mr.  Timothy  Gibbard, 

Mr.  John  Kingsbury, 

Noah  Baldwin. 

6, 

Noah  Baldwin, 

Asahel  Bronson, 

Asahel  Bronson, 

Nimrod  Hull. 

7, 

John  Kingsbury, 

Thomas  M.  Culver, 

Eli  Bronson, 

Nimrod  Hull. 

8, 

Thomas  M.  Culver, 

Giles  Brocket, 

Ximrod  Hull, 

Andrew  Adams. 

9, 

Giles  Brocket, 

Andrew  Adams, 

John  Kingsbury, 

Giles  Brocket. 

10, 

Noah  Baldwin, 

Noah  Baldwin, 

John  Kingsbury, 

Andrew  Adams. 

11, 

Daniel  Steele, 

Daniel  Steele, 

Andrew  Adams, 

Andrew  Adams. 

12, 

John  Kingsbury, 

John  Kingsbury, 

Truman  Porter, 

Truman  Porter. 

13, 

John  Kingsbury, 

John  Kingsbury, 

Truman  Porter, 

Truman  Porter. 

1*, 

Cyrus  Clark, 

Cyrus  Clark, 

Frederick  Hotchkiss, 

Frederick  Hotchkiss. 

15, 

Andrew  Adams, 

James  Scovill, 

William  K.  Lamson, 

Truman  Porter. 

16, 

Andrew  Adams, 

Andrew  Adams, 

James  Scovill, 

Daniel  Steele. 

17, 

Daniel  Steele, 

James  M.  L.  Scovill, 

Timothy  Gibbard, 

Timothy  Gibbard. 

18, 

James  M.  L.  Scovill, 

Ashley  Scott, 

Timothy  Gibbard, 

Andrew  Adams. 

bl3 


Watertown  Representatives. 


May  Session. 


81,  Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Maj.  Jesse  Curtis, 

82,  Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 
Capt.  Phineas  Royce. 

83,  Capt.  Thomas  Feiin, 
Capt.  Nathaniel  Barnes, 

84,  Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 
Capt.  Nathaniel  Barnes, 

85,  Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Maj.  David  Smith, 

86,  Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Col.  David  Smith, 

87,  Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Capt.  Daniel  Potter, 

88,  Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Col.  David  Smith, 

89,  Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Mr.  Wait  Smith, 

90,  Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Col.  David  Smith, 

91,  Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Mr.  David  Smith, 


October  Session 

Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Mr.  Jesse  Curtis. 
Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Capt.  Phineas  Royce. 
Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Capt.  Nathaniel  Barnes. 
Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Capt.  Nathaniel  Barnes. 
Capt.  Samuel  Hickox, 
Maj.  David  Smith. 
Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Maj.  David  Smith. 
Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Capt.  Daniel  Potter. 
Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Capt.  Daniel  Potter. 
Capt.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Col.  David  Smith. 
Col.  David  Smith, 
Capt.  Daniel  Potter. 
Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Mr.  David  Smith. 
Mr.  Elijah  Woodward, 
Mr.  David  Smith. 


574 


HISTORY    OF   WATEEBUKY. 


May  Session. 
1792,  Mr.  Elijah  Woodward, 
Mr.  David  Smith, 

93,  Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Mr.  Joseph  A.  Wright, 

94,  Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Mr.  Joseph  A.  Wright, 

95,  Mr.  Aner  Bradley, 
Mr.  Joseph  A.  Wright, 

96,  Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 

97,  Mr.  Aner  Bradley, 

98,  Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Mr.  Samuel  W.  Southmayd, 
Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 

3,  Mr.  Samuel  W.  Southmayd, 

4,  Mr.  Samuel  W.  Southmayd, 

5,  Thomas  Fenn, 

6,  Samuel  W.  Southmayd, 

7,  Thomas  Fenn, 

8,  Samuel  W.  Southmayd, 

9,  John  H.  Deforest, 

10,  Garret  Smith, 

11,  Samuel  W.  Southmayd, 

12,  Samuel  W.  Southmayd, 

13,  Garret  Smith, 

14,  Garret  Smith, 

1.5,  John  H.  Deforest, 

16,  David  Baldwin, 

17,  Samuel  Elton, 

18,  Amos  Baldwin, 


99, 

1800, 

1, 

2, 


October  Session, 
Mr.  Elijah  Woodward, 
Mr.  Daniel  Potter. 
Mr.  Thomas  Fenn, 
Mr.  Joseph  A.  Wright. 
Mr.  Elijah  Woodward. 

Mr.  Thomas  Fenn. 

Mr.  Aner  Bradley. 

Mr.  Thomas  Fenn. 

Mr.  Samuel  W.  Southmayd. 

Mr.  Thomas  Fenn. 

Mr.  Thomas  Fenn. 

Mr.  Samuel  W.  Southmayd. 

Mr.  Samuel  W.  Southmayd. 

Mr.  Thomas  Fenn. 

Mr.  Samuel  W.  Southmayd. 

Samuel  W.  Southmayd. 

Samuel  W.  Southmayd. 

Samuel  W.  Southmayd. 

Samuel  W.  Southmayd. 

John  H.  Deforest. 

Garret  Smith. 

Samuel  W.  Southmayd. 

Samuel  W.  Southmayd. 

Garret  Smith. 

John  H.  Deforest. 

John  H.  Deforest. 

David  Baldwin. 

Samuel  Elton. 

Amos  Baldwin. 


1795, 
96, 

97, 

98, 

99, 

1800, 

1, 

2, 

3, 

4, 

5, 

6, 

7, 


May  Session. 

Mr.  David  Smith, 
Mr.  David  Smith, 
Mr.  David  Smith, 
Mr.  Daniel  Potter, 
Mr.  Daniel  Potter, 
Mr.  Daniel  Potter, 
Mr.  Lake  Potter, 
Mr.  David  Smith, 
Mr.  David  Smith, 
Mr.  David  Smith, 
Lake  Potter, 
Lake  Potter, 
Lake  Potter, 
Daniel  Potter, 
Daniel  Potter, 
Daniel  Potter, 
Lake  Potter, 
Lake  Potter, 
Calvin  Butler, 
Jacob  Hemingway, 
Calvin  Butler, 
Calvin  Butler, 
Calvin  Butler, 


Plymouth  Representatives. 

October  Session. 
Mr.  David  Smith. 
Mr.  David  Smith. 
Mr.  David  Smith. 
Mr.  Lake  Potter. 
Mr.  Daniel  Potter. 
Mr.  Daniel  Potter. 
Mr.  David  Smith. 
Mr.  Lake  Potter. 
Mr.  David  Smith. 
Mr.  David  Smith. 
Mr.  David  Smith. 
Lake  Potter. 
Lake  Potter. 
Lake  Potter. 
Daniel  Potter. 
Daniel  Potter. 
David  Smith. 
David  Smith. 
Lake  Potter. 
Calvin  Butler. 
Jacob  Hemingway. 
Calvin  Butler. 
Frederick  Stanley. 
Jacob  Hemingway 


575 


[IDDLEBURY    RePRESESTATITES 


May  Session. 

October  Session. 

1808, 

Isaac  Bronson, 

Aaron  Benedict. 

9, 

Aaron  Benedict, 

David  Thompson. 

10, 

Aaron  Benedict, 

Aaron  Benedict. 

11, 

Eli  Bronson, 

Eli  Bronson. 

12, 

Eli  Bronson, 

Eli  Bronson. 

13, 

Eli  Bronson, 

Eli  Bronson. 

14, 

David  Thompson, 

Nathaniel  Richardson. 

15, 

Nathaniel  Richardson, 

Philo  Bronson. 

16, 

Pliilo  Bronson, 

Nathaniel  Richardson. 

17, 

Philo  Bronson, 

Philo  Bronson. 

18, 

Pliilo  Bronson, 

Philo  Bronson. 

The  members  from  Waterbury  of  the  Convention  of  Connecticut,  in  Jan.  1788, 
to  ratify  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  were,  Joseph  Hopkins  and  John 
Welton.     They  both  voted  in  favor  of  the  Constitution.     . 


Episcopalians  of  Nortiibury  i 
warned  to  meet  and  orga7ii 

Solomon  Allen, 
Abner  Blakeslee, 
Titus  Barnes, 
Asher  Blakeslee, 
Eli  Blakeslee, 
Hosea  Blin, 
Moses  Blakeslee, 
Samuel  Blakeslee, 
Philo  Bradley, 
Amos  Bronson, 
Ebenezcr  Bradley, 
Noah  Blakeslee,  ' 
Jude  Blakeslee, 
Ebenezer  Bradley,  Jr. 
John  Brown, 
Thomas  Blakeslee, 
Wid.  Abigail  Blakeslee, 
Joab  Camp, 
Abishai  Castle, 
Zadoc  Curtis, 
Amasa  Castle, 
Ezra  Dodge, 
Samuel  Fenn, 
Ebenezer  Ford, 
Jesse  Fenn, 
Lemuel  Fancher, 
Cephas  Ford, 
Barnabas  Ford, 
Isaac  Fenn, 


N  October,  1*784,  being  the  Names  of  the  Persons 
ze  themselves  hito  a  Society  referred  to  p.  312. 

Enos  Ford, 
Daniel  Ford, 
Amos  Ford, 
Cornelius  Graves, 
Benjamin  Graves, 
Simeon  Graves, 
Zaccheus  How, 
Eliphalet  Hartshorn, 
Eliphalet  Hartshorn,  Jr., 
Jesse  HumastOR, 
David  Ludington, 
Zebulon  Moshcr, 
Chauncey  Moss, 
Jacob  Potter, 
Samuel  Peck,  Jr., 
Samuel  Potter, 
Gideon  Seymour, 
David  Shelton, 
Ezekiel  Sanford,  Jr., 
Abel  Sutliff,  Jr., 
Samuel  Scovill,  Jr., 
Jesse  Turner, 
William  Tuttle, 
Thomas  Williams, 
Eli  Welton, 
Thomas  Way, 
Ozias  Warner, 
Thomas  Williams,  Jr. 
Samuel  Way. 


INDEX, 


A. 

Bronson,  Lt.  Josiah, 

470 

Andruss  Family, 

131 

Capt.  Ezra, 

471 

John, 

25 

Philo, 

473 

Joseph, 

28 

Silas, 

474 

Abraham,  Sen., 

131 

Noah  M., 

475 

Abraham,  Jr., 

134 

Brown  Genealogy, 

478 

Abraham,  3d, 

133 

Dea.  James, 

387 

John, 

133 

James, 

244 

Thomas, 

133 

Capt.  Hezekiah, 

321 

Arnold,  Nathaniel,  Sen., 

244 

Beebe,  Lt.  Ira, 

343 

Rev.  Jonathan, 

293 

Blakeslee  Genealogy, 

466 

Alcott  Genealogy, 

459 

James, 

245 

Amos  Bronson, 

457 

Rev,  Solomon, 

303 

Dr.  William  A., 

447 

Dea.  Moses, 

46*7 

Adams  Genealogy, 

458 

Capt.  Thomas, 

468 

Articles  of  settlement  of  Mattatuck, 

8 

Barnes  Family, 

135 

Benjamin, 

135 

B. 

John, 

136 

Bronson  Genealogy, 

137 

469 

Thomas, 

135 

John  of  Farming 

ton, 

12, 

137 

Butler,  Calvin, 

388 

Abraham, 

25 

Barber,  Rev.  Horace  V. 

305 

John  1st  of  "Waterbury, 

138 

Benedict  Genealogy, 

463 

Serj.  Isaac, 

33, 

140 

Dea.  Thomas, 

463 

Rev.  Tillotson, 

304, 

376 

Amos, 

370 

Isaac,  Jr.,  141 ; 

fined 

for 

Aaron, 

465 

breaking    the 

Sabbath, 

Dea.  Aaron, 

448 

318  ;  his  petition, 

318 

Buckingham  Genealogy, 

479 

Dr.  Isaac, 

370 

Rev.  Mr., 

283 

Ethel, 

374 

Burning  about  the  common  fence, 

57 

Isaac  H., 

375 

Boundaries,  settlement  of. 

74 

Bennet, 

379 

Buckshill  settled. 

251 

Enos, 

384 

Break-neck  HiU  settled. 

251 

WilUam, 

139 

Bars,  common. 

68 

Moses, 

139 

Birth,  first  on  record. 

130 

John  2d, 

141 

first  male  on  record. 

130 

Joseph, 

142 

first  in  Westbury, 

660 

Thomas  1st, 

142 

Bridges, 

98 

Ebenezer, 

142 

Burying  yards,                               228 

369 

Lt.  Michael, 

344 

Brand,  town. 

209 

Hon.  Alvin, 

450 

BiUs  of  credit. 

284 

37 


578 


Carpenter,  David,  29 

Carrington,  John,  143 

John,  Jr.,  143 

Clark  Genealogy,  143,  483 

Thomas,  143 

Rev.  Anson,  484 

Castle  Genealogy,  481 

Isaac,  245 

Capt.  Phineas, 
Cook  Genealogy, 
Calkins,  Israel,  taken  prisoner, 
Clerks  of  town,  563 

Commissioners  of  town,  567 

Committee,  grand,  6 

their  last  act,  77 

Church,  1st  of  Waterbury  organiz- 
ed, 206 ;  members  of,  207  ;  Bap- 
tist, 553;  Methodist  Episcopal, 
556;  Catholic,  558;  2d  Congre- 
gational, 558 
Church  and  State,  315 
Congregationalism,  the  established 

religion,  315 

Clocks,  316,  435 

Churchmen  of  Waterbury,         219,  330 
Clergy,  Episcopal,  "  332 

Constitutional    Convention,     mem- 
bers of,  575 
Currency,  depreciation  of,  284 


Button,  Rev.  Aaron,  388 

Rev.  Matthew  R.  389 

Henry,  LL.  D.,  455 

De  Forest  Genealogy,  487 

Deed,  Indian,  of  1657,2;  of  1674, 
10;  deeds  of  1684  and  1685,  62, 
63;  of  1711,  64;  of  1674,  assign- 
ed by  committee,  15 ;  of  release 
from  General  Court,  69 

Deacons  of  Waterbury,  29,  291 ;  of 

Westbury,  261 ;  of  Northbury,       269 
Deaths  of  proprietors,  114 

Dayton  robbery,  374 

Deputies  of  Waterbury,  569 

of  Watertown,  573  ;  of  Ply- 
mouth, 574;  of  Middle- 
bury,  575 

E. 

Ecclesiastical  affairs,  202 

Episcopacy  in  Waterbury,  231,  292 ; 
names  of  churchmen,  294 ;  town 
votes  £12  for  a  site  for  a  church, 
295 ;  church  built,  295  ;  petition 
for  parish  privileges,  and  names  of 
petitioners,  296  ;  glebe  lands,  297  ; 
parish  votes,  300 ;  second  house         I 


of  worship  built,  306  ;  dedicated, 
307  ;  Rev.  James  Scovill's  letter,  328 

Episcopacy  in  Westbury,  300; 
names  of  churchmen,  308  ;  house 
of  worship  built,  308 ;  second  house 
of  worship,  309;  church  funds,  &c.,  309 

Episcopacy  in  Northbury,  310  ; 
names  of  some  of  the  members, 
311;  society  organized,  312  ;  new 
church  erected,  313  ;    fund,    311,  314 


243 
303 
390 
456 
390 


action 


of 
46 

47,  62 

47,  62 

5 

102,  103,  104 

111,  112 

237 

237 

237 

257 


Fulford,  Gershom, 

Foot,  Rev.  David, 

Foote,  Ebenezer, 
Samuel  A., 

Fenn,  Dea.  Thomas, 

Farrell,  Almon, 

Farmington     church 
1677-8, 

Fence,  common, 

Field,  common, 
owners  in. 

Forts, 

Floods, 

Families  at  Judd's  Meadow, 
Wooster  Swamp, 
Buckshill, 
Westbury, 

Farmingbury  petition  for  -winter 
privileges,  279  ;  not  granted,  280 ; 
again  petitions  with  success,  280  ; 
made  a  society,  282  ;  a  town,  282 

Freemen,  list  of,  248 

French  army  passes  through  Water- 
bury, 359 

Fulling  mills,  91 


Gridley,  Thomas,  26 

Samuel,  26 

Gaylord  Family,  145 

Joseph,  Sen.,  145 

Joseph,  Jr.,  146 

John,  147 

William,  147 

Griswold,  Rev.  Alexander  V.,  304 

Green,  Rev.  William,  304 

Guernsey  Genealogy,  491 

Dea.  Jonathan,  491 

Gates,  common,  57 


Higason,  William,  26 

Ilancox,  Thomas,  147 

Hickox  Genealogy,  148,  496 

Sergt.  Samuel,  148 

Joseph  1st,  151 

Samuel  2d,  149 


579 


Hickox,  William,  149 

Dea.  Thomas,  lo(i 

Joseph  2d,  150 

Steplien,  150 

Benjamin,  150 

Dea.  Samuel,  498 

Rev.  Laurens  P.,  498 

Hopkins  Genealogy,  151,  502 

John,  of  Hartford,  151 

Stephen,  of  Hartford,  151 

John,  of  Waterburj,  152 

Rev.  Samuel,  398 

Samuel,  D.  D.,  399 

Daniel,  D,  D.,  408 

Mark,  410 

Joseph,  Esq.,  411 

Jesse,  412 

Dr.  Lemuel,  414 

Samuel  M.,  LL.  D.,  416 

Stephen,  of  Waterbury,        153 

Timothy,  153 

Hurlbut,  Joseph,  245 

Hart,  Rev.  Seth,  304 

Rev.  Luther,  393 

Hoadley,  David,  396 

David,  Jr.,  456 

Holmes,  Capt.  Reuben,  396 

Israel,  457 

Harrison  Genealogy,  495 

Hotchkiss  Genealogy,  505 

Dea.  Gideon,  506 

Herding,  58 

Home  lots,  11,  22 

Houses,  log,  erected,  17 

Horses,  wild,  209 

Highwavs,  17,  93 

Hogfields,  42 

I. 

Ives,  Dr.  Ambrose,  420 

Incorporation  of  Waterbury,  67 

Indians  kill  Holt,  105 

capture  Scott,  105 
Indian  character,                            65,  107 

J. 

Judd  Genealogy,  155,  508 

Dea.  Thomas,  of  Farmington,    155 
Sergt.  William,  27,  46,  155 


Benjamin, 

29 

159 

Thomas,  Jr., 

32 

164 

Lt.  Thomas, 

156 

Philip, 

158 

William,  son  of 

Philip, 

159 

Philip,  Jr., 

159 

Dea.  Thomas, 

159 

208 

Capt.  William, 

163 

John, 

157 

Rev.  Jonathan, 

421 

Samuel, 

27 

John,  of  Farmin 

gton. 

27 

Jones,  Benjamin, 
Judd's  Meadow  settled, 
Justices  of  peace, 


Kingsbury  Genealogy, 

John, 

Maj.  Julius  J.  B. 
Kendrick  Genealogy, 
Green, 


154 
250 
567 


517 
424 
422 
513 
514 


Leavenworth  Genealogy,  515 

Rev.  Mark,  616 ;  his  ministry, 
283 ;  is  chaplain  in  tlie 
French  Avar,  289  ;  reproves 
Samuel  Root  for  sleeping 
in  meeting,  289 

Mark,  son  of  Jesse,  425,  518 

Lankton  or  Langdon,  John,  27 

Lewis  Genealogy,  165,  518 

Dea.  Joseph, 
Joseph,  sentenced, 
Ludington,  William, 
Lyon,  Rev.  James, 
La  Fayette,  Gen. 
Luxuries  after  the  Revolution, 
Lists  of  Waterbury, 
List  of  polls  and  estate  in  1737, 
Lands,  Record  of,  23  ;  divisions  of, 
38,    39,    40,    41,    124,    127  ;   se- 
questered, 77,  80,  82,  84,  91,  203; 
sold,    239 ;    grants  of,    42,   127 ; 
given    away,    117;     ministerial, 
203,   229;  school, 
Little  pasture,  203, 


165 
322 
245 
293 
358 
365 
564 
665 


230 


M. 


Mansfield,  Rev.  Richard,  293 

Mcrriman  Genealogy,  480 

Manufacturing  in  Waterburv,    411,  559 
Mills,  79  to  93  ;  mill  place,  86 ;  mill 

lands,  84 

Meeting  house,  petition  respecting, 
208;  alterations  of,  222;  seating 
of,  223 ;  votes  respecting  a  new 
meeting  house,  224;  it  is  par- 
tially finished,  226 ;  seating  of, 
227  ;  vote  to  finish  it,  227  ;  third 
meeting  house,  291 

Minister's  propriety,  34 

Minister's  house,  204,  213;   subscri- 
bers names,  214 
Middlebury  petition  for  winter  priv- 
ileges, 276  ;  made  a  society,  278  ; 
a  town,                                               279 
Miscellaneous  items,  367 


580 


N. 
Newell  Family,  167 

Thomas  and  others  petition- 
ers in  1673,  5 
Thomas,  Sen.                       28,  167 
Thomas,  Jr.                               168 
John,                                           168 
Naugatucli,  origin  of  name,                   15 
New  settlers,                                          243 
Navigation  of  the  Naugatuck,  _    _      101 
Non-intercourse  with  Great  Britain,  335 
Northbury  settled,  261 ;  names  of  set- 
tlers and  petition  for  winter  priy- 
leges,  262  ;  incorporated  as  a  so- 
ciety, 264  ;  petition  to  the  Legis- 
lature for  a  committee  to  estab- 
lish  boundaries  of   the    society,     . 
■      264;    first    society   meeting    in- 
vites Mr.  Todd  to   settle,  be  ac- 
cepts and   is  ordained,  265 ;  his 
dismission,    268;    Rev.    Andrew 
Storrs,  269  ;   early  deacons,  269  ; 
first  house  of  worship,  270  ;  first 
meeting  house,  270;  second  meet- 
ing  house,   274;  seating   of  the 
same,                                              274 

0. 

Olmstead,  Lt.  Nicholas,  7 

Oxford  parish  incorporated,  276 


Peck,  Rev.  Jeremiah,  34,  169;  in- 
vited to  settle  at  Waterbury,  204 ; 
he  accepts,  204  ;  agreement  with, 
204;    his  death,    210;    his   resi- 
dence at  New  Haven,   Guilford, 
Saybrook,   Newark    and    Green- 
wich, 210 
Peck  Genealogy,  169 
Dea.  Jeremiah,  170 
Jeremiah,  Jr.,  lYO 
Caleb,  170 
Samuel,  170 
Joshua,  171 
Porter  Genealogy,                       171,  519 
Doct.  Daniel,  of  Farmington,  171 
Doct.  Daniel,  of  Waterbury,  172 
Doct.  Daniel,  Jr.,  173 
James,  173 
Thomas,  173 
Richard,  173 
Doct.  Daniel,   son   of  Rich- 
ard, 174 
Samuel,  175 
Timothy,  175 
Rev.  Edward,  290 
John,  26 
Robert,  175 


Porter,  Thomas,  of  Farmington,  175 

Potter,  Gen.  Daniel,  427 

Prindle,  Jonathan,  245 

Nathan,  245 

Rev.  Chauncey,  303,  309 

Prichard  Genealogy,  524 

Petition  of  inhabitants  of  Farming- 
ton  for  a  settlement  at  Mattatuck, 
in  1673,  4 

Petition  of  Rev.  J.  Peck  and  Isaac 
Bronson  for  permission  to  organ- 
ize a  church,  205 
Petition  of  Isaac  Bronson,  Jr.,  318 
Patents  of  Waterbury,                     67,  69 
Protest  of  John  Stanley  against  pro- 
prietors giving  away  lands,  118 
Probate  Courts,  563  ;  judges  of,         563 
Pounds,  61 
Puritans,  character  of,                          243 
Population,  increase  of,               243,  566 
of  Waterbury,          362,  566 
Physicians  of  Waterbury,                    291 
Perambulation,      .  76 
Proprietors,  first  meeting  of,  13 
rights,  amount  of,             34 
names  of,  9,  24,  31,  40, 

55,  70,  125 

bachelor,  113  to  120; 
original  and  bachelor 
of  1722,  125;  vacan- 
cies of  how  filled, 
30;  subscribers  who 
secured  their  rights, 
31;  votes  of,  of  1697 
and  1702-3,  116 


Root,  John, 

29 

Samuel, 

289 

Richards  Genealogy, 

176 

Obadiah, 

176 

John, 

178 

Hon.  Mark, 

427 

Obadiah,  Jr., 

178 

Thomas, 

178 

Benjamin, 

178 

Richardson  Genealogy, 

179,  526 

Thomas,  " 

179 

John, 

180 

Thomas,  Jr., 

180 

Israel, 

180 

Nathaniel, 

181 

Ebenezer, 

181 

Reed,  Rev.  John,  invited  to  settle,     212 
Report  of  committee  to  view  Matta- 
tuck, 5 ;  action  of  the  Court  on 
the  same,  6 

Roads,  17,  93,  357 

Removal  of  proprietors,  113 

Revival  of  1740,  296 


581 


Representatives    of  "Waterbury 

to 

Sickness  of  1712,  113;  of  1749 

324 

Gen.  Court,  569 ;  of  Watertown, 

Slaves, 

320 

573;  of  Plymouth,  574;  of  Middle- 

Slavery  aboUshed  in  Conn., 

323 

bury,  575  ;  to  Constitutional  Con- 

Saw mills. 

90 

vention  in  1788, 

575 

Scouts, 

102 

Subscribers  to  the  articles  of  settle- 

S. 

ment. 

9 

Steele,  Ens.  Samuel, 

7 

Subscribers,  delinquent, 

24,45 

Rev.  Ashbel, 

547 

who      secured 

their 

Stanley  Familv, 

Capt.  John, 

188 

rights. 

31 

188 

Streets,  original  village. 

17 

Lt.  John,             13,  41, 

118, 

189 

Settlers,  first,  of    Waterbury, 

per- 

John,  Jr., 

191 

sonal  notices  of. 

129, 

167 

Samuel, 

191 

Settlers,  new,  notices  of, 

245 

Timothy  2d, 

191 

Society,  1st,  first  meeting  of, 

283 

Lt.  Timothy, 

191 

Southmayd,  Rev.  John,  34,  187 

;in- 

T. 

vited   to   settle,    215;    ordained, 

Talcott,  Maj.  John, 

6 

216  ;    asks  the  town  to  procure 

Terrv,  Eli, 

435 

another    minister,    218 ;     offices 

Todd,  Rev.  Samuel, 

266 

which  he  held,  220 ;  inventory  of 

Thomas,  Samuel, 

245 

his  estate, 

221 

Trumbull,  Rev.  John, 

258 

Southmayd,  John,  Jr.f 

188, 

287 

John,  LL.  D., 

441 

Capt.  Daniel, 

188, 

434 

house. 

260 

Samuel  ^f., 

435 

Town  meetings, 

334 

346 

Seymour,  Richard, 

26 

Tax  pavers  of  1760,  277  ;  of  1737, 

565 

Smith,  Maj.  David, 

349 

lists,  &c.. 

362 

Scovill  Genealogy, 

186 

Town  plot,  old,                    10, 

14,  36,  37 

John  1st," 

186 

new. 

17 

Sergt.  John, 

187 

Townsmen  and  constables  first  cho- 

Lt. John, 

187 

sen, 

76 

Rev.  James, 

299 

301 

Train  band. 

110 

J.  M.  Lamson, 

429 

Tories,                                  347 

,352 

,354 

WilHam  H. 

431 

laws  against, 

352 

Small  pox, 

357 

Scott  Genealogy, 

181 

527 

IJ. 

Jonathan,  and  his  two 

sons. 

Upson  Genealogy, 

Sergt.  Stephen, 

193 

taken  by  the  Indians, 

105 

184 

193 

Thomas, 

181 

Thomas,  of  Hartford, 

193 

Edmund,  Sen., 
Edmund,  Jr., 
Samuel, 

32 

181 
183 

184 

Stephen,  Jr., 
Stephen,  Esq., 
Benoni,  D.  D.,        , 

194 
443 
443 

George, 

182 

Thomas,  of  Waterbury 

194 

John, 

184 

John, 

194 

Robert, 

183 

Joseph, 

183 

Y. 

Jonathan,  Jr., 

185 

Eleazer, 

185 

Village  lots. 

252 

Dr.  Daniel, 

186 

W. 

David, 

182 

Storrs,  Rev.  Andrew, 

269 

Webster,  Lt.  Robert, 

1 

Smith,  Junius,  LL.  D., 

432 

Wadsworth,  Ens.  John, 

8 

Settlement  of  Waterburv  begun, 

16 

Warner  Genealogy, 

195 

Schools,  234 ;  votes  of  the  tois 

n  re 

John  of  Farmington, 

24,  195 

specting  them. 

235 

John, 

195 

School  lands,  sale  of. 

239 

Daniel  1st, 

25 

,  198 

house, 

238 

Daniel  2d, 

198 

moneys, 

240 

Doct.  John, 

196 

Sheep, 

59 

Samuel, 

200 

Sabbath  day  houses, 

228 

Thomas, 

198 

Warner,  Doct.  Ephraim, 

196 

Benjamin, 

199 

John,  son  of  Thomas, 

199 

Ebenezer, 

198 

Robert, 

198 

"Welton  Genealogy, 

200 

John, 

200 

John,  Jr. 

201 

Stephen, 

201 

Richard, 

201 

Thomas, 

201 

George, 

201 

Capt.  John, 

.    446 

Woodward  Genealogy, 

551 

Weeks,  Rev.  Holland, 

290 

Waterman,  Rev.  Simeon, 

269 

Wooster,  Rev.  Benjamin, 

446 

Washington,  Gen. 

358 

Tear,  old  and  new. 

16 

Waterbury  incorporated. 

67 

origin  of  name. 

67 

patents  of,              67, 

68,  69 

petitions  Gen.  Court,  for 
abatement  of  taxes,  208,  325 


Wooster  Swamp,  252 

Westbm-y  settled,  252 ;  petitions 
for  winter  privileges,  254  ;  peti- 
tions for  a  distinct  society  and  is 
opposed  by  town,  255 ;  again  pe- 
titions with  success,  256 ;  location 
of  its  meeting  house,  258 ;  its 
early  deacons,  261 ;  incorporated 
as  a  town,  275 

War,  Indian,  101;  King  Philip's, 
11 ;  French,  and  names  of 
soldiers  engaged  in,  326 

War,  Revolutionary,  329 ;  officers 
of  alarm  companies,  340 ; 
names  of  men  who  left  Wa- 
terbury intending  to  join  the 
enemy,  354 ;  La  Fayette, 
Washington  and  the  French 
army,  359  ;  clothing  furnish- 
ed, 341  ;  names  of  soldiers 
in  the  war,  349 ;  provisions 
furnished  by  Watertown,  360 

Wild  horses,  .  209 


COERECTIONS. 


Page  123,  22d  line  from  top,/o>-  1622,  read  1722. 
142,  last  line,  for  Sept.  28,  read  Sept.  29. 
173,  19th  Une  from  top, /or  1770,  read  1720. 
371,  4th  line  from  bottom,  erase  traveled  in  Europe. 
374,  12th  line  from  top, /or  1798,  read  1796. 
374,  13th  line  from  bottom, /or  86th,  read  85th. 
374,  14th  Une  from  bottom,  for  1839,  read  1838. 

377,  15th  and  16th  Hncs  from  top, /or  by  invitation  of  the  Episcopal  Con- 
vention, read  in  compliance  with  the  wishes  of  the  Episcopal  clergy 


582 


Warner,  Doct.  Ephraim, 

196 

Benjamin, 

199 

John,  son  of  Thomas, 

199 

Ebenezer, 

198 

Robert, 

198 

"Welton  Genealogy, 

200 

John, 

200 

John,  Jr. 

201 

Stephen, 

201 

Richard, 

201 

Thomas, 

201 

George, 

201 

Capt.  John, 

,    446 

Woodward  Genealogy, 

651 

Weeks,  Rev.  Holland, 

290 

Waterman,  Rev.  Simeon, 

269 

Wooster,  Rev.  Benjamin, 

446 

Washington,  Gen. 

358 

Year,  old  and  new. 

16 

Waterbury  incorporated, 

67 

origin  of  name. 

67 

patents  of,               67, 

68,  69 

petitions  Gen.  Court,  for 
abatement  of  taxes,  208, 


Wooster  Swamp,  252 

Westbury  settled,  252 ;  petitions 
for  winter  privileges,  254  ;  peti- 
tions for  a  distinct  society  and  is 
opposed  by  town,  255 ;  again  pe- 
titions with  success,  256 ;  location 
of  its  meeting  house,  258 ;  its 
early  deacons,  261 ;  incorporated 
as  a  town,  275 

War,  Indian,  101;  King  Philip's, 
11 ;  French,  and  names  of 
soldiers  engaged  in,  326 

War,  Revolutionary,  329 ;  officers 
of  alarm  companies,  340 ; 
names  of  men  who  left  Wa- 
terbury intending  to  join  the 
enemy,  354 ;  La  Fayette, 
Washington  and  the  French 
army,  359  ;  clothing  furnish- 
ed, 341  ;  names  of  soldiers 
in  the  war,  349 ;  provisions 
furnished  by  Watertown,  360 

Wild  horses,  209 


Page  138,  loth  line  from  top,  /or  lti47,  read  1747. 

Page  138,  17th  line  fi-om  top — Mr.  Kill)ourn,  in  his  "  Kilbourn  Family,"  state? 
that  Sarah  Bronson  m.  John  Kilbourn. 

Page  150,  11th  and  12th  lines  from  bottom,  /<»•  of  Durham  previously  of  Say- 
brook  ?  read  of  Farmington. 

Page  169,  3d  line  from  top,  /or  ^Vrothern  read  Wrotliam. 

Page  l7o,  18th  line  from  top, /or  but  not  read  and. 

Page  181.  Erase  the  paragraph  ne.xt  after  "Scott."  Tlionias  Scott  had  an  only 
son,  77io7nas,  and  3  daughters,  Mary,  Sarah,  and  Klvnihrth.  I  know  not  whose 
son  Edmund  Scott,  Sen.  was. 

Page  183,  13th  and  14th  Hnesfrom  top,  erane  I  suppose  he  was  a  literal  bachelor. 

Page  186.  Erase  the  four  last  lines.  The  error  arose  from  misunderstanding 
Mr.  Porter's  manuscript.     John  Scovill  is  not  known  to  have  but  one  child,  John. 

Page  290,  2d  line  from  bottom,  for  where  he  died,  read  and  died  in  New 
New  Haven. 

[For  other  corrections,  see  the  beginning  of  the  volume.] 


COREECTIONS. 


Page  123,  22d  line  from  top, /or  1622,  read  1722. 

142,  last  line,  for  Sept.  28,  read  Sept.  29. 

173,  19th  line  from  top,  for  1770,  read  1720. 

371,  4th  Hne  from  bottom,  erase  traveled  in  Europe. 

374,  12th  line  from  top, /or  1798,  read  1796. 

374,  13th  line  from  bottom, /o7-  86th,  read  85th. 

374,  14th  hne  from  bottom,  for  1839,  read  1838. 

377,  15th  and  16th  Hnes  from  top, /or  by  invitation  of  the  Episcopal  Con- 
vention, read  in  compliance  with  the  wishes  of  the  Episcopal  clergy 
and  laity. 

377,  last  Hne  but  one,  for  Rev.  Dr.  Noble's,  read  Rev.  Mr.  Noble's. 

387,  11th  hne  from  bottom,  for  the  Brown  &  Elton  Co.,  reacZ  Brown  & 
Elton.     (The  sentence  is  badly  constructed.) 

398,  5th  line  from  top, /or  1852,  read  1832. 

398,  11th  line  from  bottom,  for  St.  Louis,  read  Jefferson  Barracks. 

422,  10th  line  from  bottom,  for  Denizen,  read  Denison. 

423,  4th  hne  from  bottom, /or  Becker,  reatZ  Bicker. 
423,  6th  hne  from  bottom,  erase  the  clause  in  parenthetic  marks. 

430,  4th  hne  from  bottom, /or  "Washington  College,  read  Trinity  College. 

431,  loth  hne  from  top,  for  Lawson,  read  Lamson. 
450,  8th  line  from  top,  for  Alvan,  read  Alvin. 

450,  last  line,  for  Gilbert,  read  GiUet. 

451,  6th,  8th,  20th  and  2Sth  lines  from  top,  for  Gilbert,  read  GiOet. 

452,  5th  and  20th  hnes  from  top,  for  port,  read  post. 
459,  12th  line  from  top, /or  John  Alcott,  read  John  Alcocke. 
495,  4th  hne  from  bottom,  for  1639,  read  1739  ? 


University  of 
Connecticut 

Libraries